<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Lauren and Emma's Weblog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:40:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Peacekeeping efforts and the role of the state by gigantorguys</title>
		<link>http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/peacekeeping-efforts-and-the-role-of-the-state/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>gigantorguys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/?p=8#comment-20</guid>
		<description>This subject brings up the interesting point of what makes a state legitimate. Traditionally, a state needed primarily two things: a territory and recognition from other states. Situations like genocide, however, have led many to believe that a state must fulfill responsibilities to its citizens in order to become completely legitimate. Under this criteria, states that commit human rights abuses, such as Sudan, would not be considered legitimate and the United Nations could intervene and end the genocide. This would also lead to a greater responsibility for other states to help struggling countries provide basic resources and public goods to their people. These situations would no longer be considered domestic because the international community would have the responsibility to intervene if a state could not provide its people with necesities. This way, wealthier nations could more actively assist poorer countries grow, prosper, and avoid conflict.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This subject brings up the interesting point of what makes a state legitimate. Traditionally, a state needed primarily two things: a territory and recognition from other states. Situations like genocide, however, have led many to believe that a state must fulfill responsibilities to its citizens in order to become completely legitimate. Under this criteria, states that commit human rights abuses, such as Sudan, would not be considered legitimate and the United Nations could intervene and end the genocide. This would also lead to a greater responsibility for other states to help struggling countries provide basic resources and public goods to their people. These situations would no longer be considered domestic because the international community would have the responsibility to intervene if a state could not provide its people with necesities. This way, wealthier nations could more actively assist poorer countries grow, prosper, and avoid conflict.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on United Nations Peacekeeping and Morality and Ethics in International Relations by loegaire</title>
		<link>http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/united-nations-peacekeeping-and-morality-and-ethics-in-international-relations/#comment-18</link>
		<dc:creator>loegaire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-18</guid>
		<description>Interesting. I&#039;d never considered that UN peacekeepers, coming from different countries, would all have to hammer out a common standard of ethics and conduct. We always sort of imagine the UN as being... The UN, not an organization made up of dozens upon dozens of wildly varying member-states. Nice post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting. I&#8217;d never considered that UN peacekeepers, coming from different countries, would all have to hammer out a common standard of ethics and conduct. We always sort of imagine the UN as being&#8230; The UN, not an organization made up of dozens upon dozens of wildly varying member-states. Nice post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peackeeping and International Relations Theory by jd</title>
		<link>http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/2008/02/07/peackeeping-and-international-relations-theory/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>jd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 03:54:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rhodeslipher.wordpress.com/?p=7#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Very good post.  Well done!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good post.  Well done!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
