dude. you have got to be kidding me. i guess i always find it a bit puzzling when, in charge of "the greatest military the world has ever known," or in general a world-annihilating power, you are saluted as the personification of peace. barack obama has no power that does not rest on violence. truly: let him disarm entirely and then see what he can do with healthcare reform. no i'm serious: it's great he wants everybody to have health insurance: now enforce an individual mandate with no coercive force: no prisons, no weapons, by sheer inspiration. but as he prosecutes his wars, he's trying to minimize civilian casualties.
give it to you again: the nobel laureate is martin luther king...with predator drones. anyway, obviously i would always choose a dissident, and to be fair the nobel often goes to dissidents. in my view, ron paul would be a more plausible choice than barack obama. not only does he want to radically curtail our military adventures, but he wants to radically curtail the power of government, i.e. violence.
i propose this to you: every principled advocate of peace is an anarchist or is embroiled in massive internal inconsistency: just p and not-p in your face.