I'm not stating that the award hasn't been giving before goals have been realized. That is not the case at all. But even in '84, Tutu had been fighting apartheid for a long time.
What has Obama been doing for a long time? Like I said above, my problem isn't with Obama winning the award but the timing of it. Remember the nomination was less than 2 weeks into his term.
I'd like to hope that he will do deeds worthy of the prize or at least try. Jimmy Carter, as much as he gets denigrated for his term in office, did a lot more to promote peace than Obama has done so far. And he didn't win the award for that but his contributions throughout his life including his leadership with Habitat for Humanity.
This isn't a right or left thing. Its a demagogue thing, Obama's charisma is outweighing his actions. If its for what he "may" do, then the committee is playing politics with the USA which is just as bad. What happens if he sucks for the rest of his term? He hasn't really accomplished anything as of yet, and may not. The inertia in D.C. is amazing. So how do we as a public not re-elect an Peace Prize winner? What would that say about us as a people?
It just stinks as gamesmanship and political maneuvering, way beyond what the award committee has done in the past.
As far as his work against nuclear proliferation see http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123905870471194735.html
None of which are policies but speech making and come well after the nomination period. Are you saying he fought prior to his election as president? As a sitting US Senator, he had no power in foreign affairs as per the Constition (although in reality they do have some).
Here is a page about his work at the UN on this subject http://www.hedgehogs.net/pg/newsfeeds/keny/item/914997/obama-resolution-on-curbing-nuclear-weapons-backed-by-un-security-council
, notice that is from late September of this year.
See what I'm saying? If they had delayed even one year, there would be less issues with this award. The timing was all wrong.