The Nobel Committee is art and part in Obama's crimes!

The sole rational decision amid the current situation, and that is to deprive of the underserved award the man responsible for millions of human deaths, would set the committee in rather an awkward position of a killer's accomplice. The committee allowed this to occur: quite an ordinary person (in the context of humanitarian activities) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize not for some real achievements, but on account of future deeds. For those who, just in advance, selected the leader of the strongest military power as the recipient of the most distinguished peace prize, admitting to making an error would become sort of recantation before the victims of the American armed involvements into domestic affairs of the sovereign states.

Now, after the end of Obama's two presidential terms, we can see with our eyes widely open "the new climate in international relations" he has been creating during all those 8 years of his rule in the USA and on the international arena. Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan – we owe war hostilities in these countries wholly to American administration and Obama personally! The emergence of ISIS is on their conscience too, as well as numerous victims and destruction! According to pallid statistics, the Nobel Prize laureate has already come into history as the most belligerent president of the USA.

On the White House and Congress sites, as well as special Internet resources, there continue to appear periodical petitions urging Obama to give back the Nobel Peace Prize he was awarded in 2009. The latest of such petitions, critical of the aggressive policy of the American president in the Middle East, says in particular that military hostilities in Libya and Syria have brought nothing, apart from the huge death toll.

So, the Nobel Committee should perhaps muster up the nerve to reconsider its own approaches and brave it at last, the thing that has been the talk of the organization back rooms since 2009. The former director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute Geir Lundestad doesn't bother to declare that "the prize was a mistake in that sense the committee didn't achieve what it had hoped for'. Former chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee Thorbjørn Jagland, in his turn, is sure the American president "should really consider" an immediate surrender of his Nobel Peace Prize Medal. Jagland allegedly suggests that Obama "may just send back the medal by mail in some box so that to escape any embarrassing situation that could emerge if he had to do this officially..."

By depriving the most influential person on the globe of the Peace Prize, not worthy of it actually, the Nobel Committee could bring to life the hopeful precedent vital for future. Otherwise, what's the need of this humanitarian prize to be awarded to one of the great, just to reach some political goals, while having a blind eye on how much blood he has on his hands?