Thank you for mentioning that, because that actually reinforces the overall point more deeply - it speaks to the exact farcical nature of the act in question - the awarding of the highest, globally accepted award toward actions that are claimed to be geared toward the enacting of a peaceful world. This is obviously false, if you award a leader ostensibly on his initial actions, without any knowledge of what the next 3 years will hold. Awarding Obama a Nobel Peace Prize was a symbolic decision, meant to reinforce the notion that solving the racial issues in the USA would somehow have some kind of long-term effect on US politics, and indirectly, on global geopolitical activity (lol, that definitely worked out super well, looking back from 2020).
Has anyone told the current US leadership that we were terrorists to our own set of oppressors, back in the day?
Sorry, but this topic upsets me because no one seems to realize what all of these subtle actions really mean in the aggregate. Maybe I'm just a kook.