cont'd ...

As for weddings being different if men organised them? I think it depends on the men. I believe that Prince William and Kate had quite a lot of input into theirs.

Who'da thunk that a topic about moral conflict would result into a gender war about who would be better wedding planners.

Just too funny.

I guess this means the topic has run its course, therefore I'd like to thank all though who gave the issue some serious thought.

For myself, after the perspective time can provide, I am no longer so happy at the assassination of bin Laden. Following the information as it is released from the US, I don't believe that there was ever a plan to bring in bin Laden alive, which I find abhorrent. No chance to demystify the man from the image as the charismatic leader of terrorists. No chance that bin Laden should be faced with the consequences of his actions on many people across this planet.

As for wedding planning - I don't see why one sex would be any better than the other.

Regards all.

Lexi, we got sidetracked because you claimed that Obama had been
snubbed. You continue to see the thing from the perspective
of a female Melbourne librarian, rather then then from a bloke
who is US Prez and who happens to be so busy, that he has twice
had to cancel official visits to Australia. Now, just a few days
before he was about to pull off a major coup, you think that
he would feel snubbed for not attending a wedding. I have news for you lol.

That was btw a private wedding, State leaders were not invited as
a matter of course. But they did invite alot of Lizzies friends,
as a courtesy to grandma, who was footing the bill after all.

If Obama had turned up with his massive security team, where would
you have put them all in the cathedral? There was standing room only
as it was.

Ronnie Reagan did not bother going to Charlies wedding, he sent the
wife. Smart man.

Blokes commonly don't see weddings as girls see them, they hold them
because that is what brides yearn for. How many blokes do you know
who store their wedding suit for the rest of their lives, as girls
do with their wedding dresses?

Plenty of blokes would be happy with a pissup at the pub, the
wedding night is far more important then what dresses people wore :)

As far as I am concerned, if couples spent the 20-30 grand that they
blow on their weddings, as a downpayment for their house, that
would be far more useful to them in the long run.

If you checkout the difference about how people reacted to the
wedding, women commented a great deal about the bridal gown,
men went nuts over the bridemaid's arse

Dear Yabby,

I did not mean to de-rail this thread. Having lived and worked in the US for close to ten years I made a comment that I thought was fairly innocent - not realizing that it would be taken the wrong way. I certainly did not intend to make this into a "gender war," on weddings ,and regret having responded to your "knowledge" of what the US President was thinking and feeling and your generalisations about the "male" and "Female" thing. As we all know you're the expert in that area and besides what would a female know anyway - especially a
librarian - right? (Perhaps more than a farmer from WA - you think?)
As Ammmonite said - too funny!

Back to the topic...

The trouble with much of Bin Laden's life, is what we truly do not know. The misunderstandings and conspiracies swirling around this man have not been helped by the shifting stories from the White House about the circumstances of his death. He certainly was no friend of the West. However, did he deserve to die and will things change for the better as a result of his death? A reader writing to The Age states:

"Kill your enemy and dump their body at sea. This was a favourite technique in the early 1970s of the Argentinian military, who were trained in the US by the US military. Obviously the American way."
Perhaps a bit too cynical?

Another, writes:

"Maybe the US knew all along where Osama bin Laden was and the 10th anniversary was a good propaganda moment to keep the voters happy?"

And then, a cartoon with the headline:

"Joy to the Western World... One Wedding and a Funeral."

And another that had the Queen talking on the telephone to the US President where she asks him, "Would you mind waiting a couple of days. We're having a large function as well."

*and besides what would a female know anyway *

Ahhh, poor Lexi, the female victim. Pull the other one lol.

I actually made some valid points, you have a considered response
or you don't. Clearly you don't. Fair enough.

As to bin Laden, the estimates I've read calculate that him and
his ilk have cost the US a trillion $. In fact he's cost all of
us a great deal. All that security on freight and passengers is
passed on to consumers.

Obama could have taken the easy option and sent in a guided missile.
But they would never have known if they really got him, besides
the most valuable thing is all those documents and data. That will
save many lives. So Obama showed courage in taking the high risk
option, its paid off. Things could have gone wrong, as they did for
Carter in Iran

Bin Laden has been responsible for the taking of enough lives,
both muslims and non muslims. He declared war on the USA and
in war, unless you surrender, you die. He died and deserved to die.
The last thing we needed was a whole lot of hostages taken to try and
free him, die instead.

Dear Yabby,

A closed mouth gathers no foot. See you on another thread.