Comments on: Theoretical peace? http://markwbaur.com/2009/10/09/theoretical-peace/ "Qui, cher monsieur, qui couchera sur le sol pour nous?" Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:05:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: dryw http://markwbaur.com/2009/10/09/theoretical-peace/#comment-39 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:08:35 +0000 http://markwbaur.com/?p=453#comment-39 agreed, TF’s over-the-top delivery not only detracted from my appreciation for his message but I think gave his column more of a spam-chain-email vibe than ought to be used for reasonable and considerate thoughts.

]]> By: Mark http://markwbaur.com/2009/10/09/theoretical-peace/#comment-38 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:12:29 +0000 http://markwbaur.com/?p=453#comment-38 Thanks!

I must admit that I’m not a big fan of Friedman, and in this particular case he seems to have made no effort to engage in anything but historicism, framing the last century as a universe of chaos swirling around and being brought into order by the shining light of the American sun. Perhaps I’m blessed (or cursed!) but I have a hard time sharing in the hyperbolic certainty to which Friedman’s stock is pegged. My reluctance to embrace his praise for military peacemakers on the one hand is perhaps a response to his flippant appeals to raw militarism on the other. I concede that this reaction may be more to the style of the delivery than to the substance of the message, but…

Two words: Friedman Unit!

]]> By: dryw http://markwbaur.com/2009/10/09/theoretical-peace/#comment-37 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:42:49 +0000 http://markwbaur.com/?p=453#comment-37 good thoughts on the award.

check Tom Friedman’s thoughts as well in the 10/10/09 NYT.

]]>