What's Wrong with the World Comments

(22:24) Beth Impson on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: Beth Impson
Date: Aug 19, 2008 10:24 PM
URL: http://inscapes.blogspot.com

Adapted from a collect in the Book of Common Prayer: "Direct Dr. Beckwith and his family, O Lord, in all their doings, with thy most gracious favor, and further them with thy continual help; that in all their works begun, continued, and ended in thee, they may glorify thy holy Name, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Rich blessings on this season of work; may it bear much fruit for His glory.

(22:10) Lydia on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: Lydia
Date: Aug 19, 2008 10:10 PM

But less than 90 miles from us. Hope to see you soon.

(21:56) Francis Beckwith on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: Francis Beckwith
Date: Aug 19, 2008 9:56 PM
URL: http://francisbeckwith.com

Steve: Ironically, I will remain still 90 miles from one of my most vociferous critics, the Casey Kasum of philosophy. :-) Frank

(20:55) Zippy on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Zippy
Date: Aug 19, 2008 8:55 PM
URL: http://zippycatholic.blogspot.com/

Aristocles: The text you quoted does not seem to be any sort of pledge on our part to intervene militarily.

(20:19) steve burton on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: steve burton
Date: Aug 19, 2008 8:19 PM

This is great news - and welcome proof that those who have done everything in their power to sabotage your career *can* be beaten.

(19:23) aristocles on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: aristocles
Date: Aug 19, 2008 7:23 PM

Thanks for the digression, feel free to provide a better analogy. Actually, I just felt the need to provide an equally-flawed analogy; its purpose had already been served.

(19:15) aristocles on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: aristocles
Date: Aug 19, 2008 7:15 PM

Zippy, Although I agree with your statement here: "Do we have an obligation to follow secret back room handshakes and winks, like the sort that arguably got Britain into WWI? No." In cases wherein this had been the case, there is definitely a point to be made (especially considering the historical blunders made) in this regard; however, I cannot see how this might actually have been such an instance. For example, kindly consider (mind you, I am in no way advocating George R's position; just merely asking your opinion here): http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/102834.htm Fact Sheet Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Washington, DC March 31, 2008 The United States and the South Ossetian Conflict U.S. Policy and Role The United States supports the territorial integrity of Georgia and a peaceful resolution of the separatist conflict in South Ossetia. The United States views Georgia’s autonomy proposal as an important step in a peace process that should be marked by direct and frequent negotiations between the two sides. The U.S. encourages the sides, with the help of the international community, to intensify their efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the conflict.

(17:39) Step2 on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Step2
Date: Aug 19, 2008 5:39 PM

Thanks for the digression, feel free to provide a better analogy. "Arbitrary" is a strange word choice for a deception that fundamentally changes the relationship/alliance you believed yourself to be in. So what counts as a reasonable reason to null the contract?

(16:59) aristocles on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: aristocles
Date: Aug 19, 2008 4:59 PM

...Nor did the engagement analogy provided by Step2, but I felt the need to indulge in such digression due to it.

(16:51) George R. on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: George R.
Date: Aug 19, 2008 4:51 PM

On general principle I think we do have an obligation to defend countries we pledge to defend, which means we should be much more selective about handing out those pledges. At least Step2 accepts the principle. Do we have an obligation to follow secret back room handshakes and winks, like the sort that arguably got Britain into WWI? No. [Look at me, I'm George R., and I'm stupid enough to try to put words in Zippy's mouth. No really, I'm that much of a fool.] The marriage analogy, however, doesn't work.

(16:33) Zippy on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Zippy
Date: Aug 19, 2008 4:33 PM
URL: http://zippycatholic.blogspot.com/

Agreements between countries are not indissoluable marriages.

(16:30) aristocles on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: aristocles
Date: Aug 19, 2008 4:30 PM

So, in other words, arbitrarily regard the marriage contract as 'null' and kick wifey to the curb? I can't say that I'm shocked considering the staggering number of divorces that occur annually within the United States alone which would perhaps attest to such a notion.

(16:03) Step2 on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Step2
Date: Aug 19, 2008 4:03 PM

In other words, do you honor the marriage contract or not? If you knew all this going into the marriage, yes. If she deliberately concealed this in order to dupe you into getting entangled in this soap opera, no. The main problem is that you have a relationship built upon such a shallow premise you probably deserve to be duped.

(15:52) aristocles on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: aristocles
Date: Aug 19, 2008 3:52 PM

The situation in Georgia is like getting engaged to a woman not because she is your beloved with mutual goals and interests, but mainly for the reason that she is blond and you like blonds. Don't forget all the unresolved issues with her ex either. Let's go even further: Say you got married to a woman whose abusive ex-husband is still madly in love with her and wants to seize her children; do you simply give up the children (which, in the reality of the matter, perhaps is the best course of action; i.e., South Ossetia to Russia) or do you, in addition to the children, kick your wife to the curb? In other words, do you honor the marriage contract or not?

(15:46) Step2 on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Step2
Date: Aug 19, 2008 3:46 PM

George, Part of the reason I rephrased the question was to show that it did not align with the reality of this particular conflict. On general principle I think we do have an obligation to defend countries we pledge to defend, which means we should be much more selective about handing out those pledges. I can't think of an accurate analogy to a military alliance but it is a formal agreement that obligates both parties to an extensive sacrifice, in some respects like a marriage does. The situation in Georgia is like getting engaged to a woman not because she is your beloved with mutual goals and interests, but mainly for the reason that she is blond and you like blonds. Don't forget all the unresolved issues with her ex either.

(13:18) Kyl Schalk on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: Kyl Schalk
Date: Aug 19, 2008 1:18 PM

Congrats.

(12:43) Roach on The Purpose-Driven Rant: Andrew Sullivan Does Not Understand Rick Warren

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:29:57 -0500

Author: Roach
Date: Aug 19, 2008 12:43 PM
URL: http://www.mansizedtarget

Sullivan embraces a distinctly continental and 19th Century kind of liberalism that demands religion stand back from political life. It is the kind of liberalism that forbids priests to wear their clothing or have festivals in an aggressively secular nation like Mexico. The Founders never embraced "secularism" contrary to the claims of Sullivan or even aggressive neoconservatives like Victor David Hanson. It is a long road from frowning on an established Church when a multitude of Christian sects take root and demanding that we hermetically seal our religious life from our social, moral, and political life.

(12:17) Zippy on Not Bad, But Tragic

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:00:53 -0500

Author: Zippy
Date: Aug 19, 2008 12:17 PM
URL: http://zippycatholic.blogspot.com/

It isn't really a yes or no question though. The question is ambiguous enough that it could encompass any number of quite different concrete situations. If we signed a treaty ratified by Congress binding us to do so, then yes, we have an obligation to do so. (That says nothing of the wisdom or even morality of entering into a particular treaty; nor does it suggest that once we've ratified a treaty we will forever be bound by it). Do we have an obligation to follow secret back room handshakes and winks, like the sort that arguably got Britain into WWI? No.

(10:26) KW on Learned Thoughts on the Russian-Georgian Question

Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:12:22 -0500

Author: KW
Date: Aug 19, 2008 10:26 AM

Here's a Spiegel interview with "the greatest man of the century" Solzhenitsyn: Solzhenitsyn also addresses the worsening relationship between Russia and the West. Why is this happening? ”I can name many reasons, but the most interesting ones are psychological, i.e. the clash of illusory hopes against reality. This happened both in Russia and in West. When I returned to Russia in 1994, the Western world and its states were practically being worshipped. Admittedly, this was caused not so much by real knowledge or a conscious choice, but by the natural disgust with the Bolshevik regime and its anti-Western propaganda. This mood started changing with the cruel NATO bombings of Serbia. It’s fair to say that all layers of Russian society were deeply and indelibly shocked by those bombings. The situation then became worse when NATO started to spread its influence and draw the ex-Soviet republics into its structure.

(10:21) Paul J Cella on We're off to Notre Dame for the 2008-09 school year

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:03:30 -0500

Author: Paul J Cella
Date: Aug 19, 2008 10:21 AM

Wake up the echoes, Frank.