"Military force still matters Norwegians"

I haven’t even finished reading the whole speech, but found this part so well said that I want to highlight it now. In it President Obama clearly defends American power, especially of the military variety, stating that it has lead to global stability for decades now. He frames this argument with Europe’s post-modern world viewpoint, where the use of military force is largely out of style, as a foil. Well said, Mr. President:

As a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower.

But the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions — not just treaties and declarations — that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest — because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

I think the Nobel committee gave this award to Obama for pretty much the opposite of the statement above. Like I said, I haven’t finished the speech, so it may go in a direction I dislike, but I’m pleased so far. Thoughts?