This has been bouncing around the blogs I read.
I didn't get tagged, but I stole it fair and square
1. One book that changed your life: James B. Jordan's
_Sociology of the Church_. I was a happy little semi-
fundy evangelical til I read that.
2. One book that you’ve read more than once:
Tolkein's _Lord of the Rings_. I need it every
time I get a whiff of Mordor in the wind.
3. One book you’d want on a desert island:
Jon Barlow's answer "A book of hymns or folk songs."
Chesterton's answer "A book on boat building."
Both are better than my thoughts.
4. One book that made you laugh:
James P. Blaylock's _The Last Coin_
One must become like a little child to
enter the kingdom of God.
5. One book that made you cry:
Solzhenitsyn's _The Gulag Archipeligo_
How can people do that to each other?
Would I be able to resist? What of my
children? That was a Christian people,
why did their faith evaporate?
6. One book that you wish had been written:
_The Collapse of Mohammed's Relgion:
How 1.5 Billion People Turned to Jesus_
7. One book that you wish had never been written:
Karl Marx's _Das Kapital_ but, maybe the post-
enlightenment revolutionary spirit was so wide-
spread that _DK's_ absence really wouldn't have changed
things much.
8. One book you’re currently reading:
I'm in the process of picking one. The big
boys are studying Modernity; I'll probably
read something on the Enlightenment/
French Revolution to start with.
9. One book you’ve been meaning to read:
John Calvin's _Institutes of the Christian
Religion._
ofs
Saturday, August 5, 2006
History Notes
As Vizzini says in _Princess Bride_, "Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia." Well, America is not exactly in an Asian land war, but it's close.
Afghanistan and Iraq have ancient histories of fighting invaders. In Afghanistan's case with bloody success against the British and the Russians. The authors of _Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias_ track the histories of Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Somalia and Chechnya up to the present battles they have waged or are waging against foreign invaders. These countries are peopled by tribes, clans, ethnic groups, and religions that all fight amongst themselves - never quite for conquest, but for the glory of a good raid. Heroics and stolen camels become the stuff of legends and vendettas. The only time all these little groups band together is when a larger group attacks them. The parable of "my tribe against the world, my clan against the tribe, my family against the clan, my brother and I against the family, me against my brother" is their motto.
As hit and run raiders, they don't present themselves in the field of battle the way a trained army would. They attack, disappear, ambush, decoy, and blend in. It doesn't take many of them to tie down a modern army. The added mixture of Islam with its eternal rewards for fallen "martyrs" and a multi-generational commitment to the battle makes fighting the ITMs facing America very difficult.
If fact, that difficulty is the main weakness of the book. The authors do not discuss the lessons of history for defeating tribes/clans/family warriors. It may be that the way to do it is far too horrible for western countries to consider, but we need to know our options. The below picture is from the British suppression of the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857. It is one of those too horrible options.
Other than that, the book is quite good. Although, there tends to be a lot of repetition because the case study peoples are so similar, but repetition aids learning in my tired old brain. The book also lacks and sorely needs a bibliography.
ofs
Afghanistan and Iraq have ancient histories of fighting invaders. In Afghanistan's case with bloody success against the British and the Russians. The authors of _Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias_ track the histories of Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Somalia and Chechnya up to the present battles they have waged or are waging against foreign invaders. These countries are peopled by tribes, clans, ethnic groups, and religions that all fight amongst themselves - never quite for conquest, but for the glory of a good raid. Heroics and stolen camels become the stuff of legends and vendettas. The only time all these little groups band together is when a larger group attacks them. The parable of "my tribe against the world, my clan against the tribe, my family against the clan, my brother and I against the family, me against my brother" is their motto.
As hit and run raiders, they don't present themselves in the field of battle the way a trained army would. They attack, disappear, ambush, decoy, and blend in. It doesn't take many of them to tie down a modern army. The added mixture of Islam with its eternal rewards for fallen "martyrs" and a multi-generational commitment to the battle makes fighting the ITMs facing America very difficult.
If fact, that difficulty is the main weakness of the book. The authors do not discuss the lessons of history for defeating tribes/clans/family warriors. It may be that the way to do it is far too horrible for western countries to consider, but we need to know our options. The below picture is from the British suppression of the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857. It is one of those too horrible options.
Other than that, the book is quite good. Although, there tends to be a lot of repetition because the case study peoples are so similar, but repetition aids learning in my tired old brain. The book also lacks and sorely needs a bibliography.
ofs
Shallow or Deep End?
Saw Shyamalan's _Lady in the Water_ last night with my two biggest boys. It wasn't the smoothest movie ever made, but we enjoyed it.
SPOILER ALERT!
The terms - narf, scrunt, and tartutic - for the the fairy tale creatures seemed too cartoonish and childish. Every time they were used, I winced. The kids also thought the sprinklers kicking on happened too often.
We did enjoy the characters. They were likeable, oddball people. Only the grass wolf was mean and nasty. The death of the harmlessly officious film critic was funny, but not all that necessary to the plot.
I don't know Shymalan's faith, but there did seem to be some Christian elements in the movie. The Narf came from the Blue World. Part of the Blue World is certainly the waters below the earth, but when the eagle takes her away, she goes to the sky and the sky blue waters above the earth. The narfs explain to man how they should properly live - what the rules are. The narf, Story, is called an angel and the role of narfs seems to be that of the angels of the OT. "For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation." However, Biblically, angels are "a flame of fire" and I don't remember associations with water.
The scrunt is a creature of the land. And represents the curse on the ground and Satan the god of this world. He brings death and destruction and is ultimately defeated by the Tartutic threesome. The Tartutic (one name for three) seems to represent the Trinity. They come from the trees as Jesus brought deliverance and judgement from The Tree. But, they are described as evil and monkey-like. Not the usual descriptions of God.
Of course, the pool, shower, sprinklers, and rain bring baptism images to mind.
Probably Shymalan would wonder "where did he get those ideas? I didn't mean that", but I saw them anyway. The movie is mildly scary, but has no "cursing, violence, nudity, or the death of a major character." It is a good fairy tale because you would want to be in it.
ofs
SPOILER ALERT!
The terms - narf, scrunt, and tartutic - for the the fairy tale creatures seemed too cartoonish and childish. Every time they were used, I winced. The kids also thought the sprinklers kicking on happened too often.
We did enjoy the characters. They were likeable, oddball people. Only the grass wolf was mean and nasty. The death of the harmlessly officious film critic was funny, but not all that necessary to the plot.
I don't know Shymalan's faith, but there did seem to be some Christian elements in the movie. The Narf came from the Blue World. Part of the Blue World is certainly the waters below the earth, but when the eagle takes her away, she goes to the sky and the sky blue waters above the earth. The narfs explain to man how they should properly live - what the rules are. The narf, Story, is called an angel and the role of narfs seems to be that of the angels of the OT. "For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation." However, Biblically, angels are "a flame of fire" and I don't remember associations with water.
The scrunt is a creature of the land. And represents the curse on the ground and Satan the god of this world. He brings death and destruction and is ultimately defeated by the Tartutic threesome. The Tartutic (one name for three) seems to represent the Trinity. They come from the trees as Jesus brought deliverance and judgement from The Tree. But, they are described as evil and monkey-like. Not the usual descriptions of God.
Of course, the pool, shower, sprinklers, and rain bring baptism images to mind.
Probably Shymalan would wonder "where did he get those ideas? I didn't mean that", but I saw them anyway. The movie is mildly scary, but has no "cursing, violence, nudity, or the death of a major character." It is a good fairy tale because you would want to be in it.
ofs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
