DZJ

Does the First Lady (First Gentleman?) have prescribed official responsibilities, or is it more an informal expectation of what a First Person does?

Why would there be?

As jakee pointed out earlier, if this 'cage' was going to be carried by hand into a building, how heavy (and thus how strong) could it have possibly been? Could have been made of chicken wire for all we know...

And a comment on the speech?

Forgive me but as far as I can see, when I contrast your remarks above with your own earlier post (no.3 in this thread), it appears that you have fallen hook line and sinker for these protestors’ bait. (And regarding ‘does not require that the force be in proportion’, would you be ok with the gunning down of ‘kidnappers’ armed with feather dusters, or water pistols?)

As someone with no particular investment in Obama's campaign one way or the other, that strikes me as a brave and elegant speech.

You realise of course that your indignation has just provided these people with some free advertising, yes?

The BBC has also recently published a survey to mark the war's fifth birthday. Full report at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_03_08iraqpollmarch2008.pdf and summary at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7299569.stm

Speaking as someone who wouldn't quite call themselves a Christian, I'd have said that Jesus did quite well in the moral authority stakes; a field in which the US has looked better in the past than it has done recently.

To be honest I don't think most people would care too much about an English national day, and some of those who would make a big point of it would follow it up with some bollocks about 'England for the English'. As for Japan, they might as well have 'Anti-Godzilla Training and Preparation Day', for all the difference it would make to their over-work culture.

'Can you say the word 'nuclear'?'

We can't take a day off, we're too busy working for the good of mankind!

Really? You'd be wrong. Note the word capable. The Japanese had no capability and no intention of invading the mainland US, so Yamamoto's point is moot. Then you should have said that in your initial post and not tried to make your point look better in retrospect by changing it.How could I have been clearer? The word 'capable' appears perfectly plainly in my original post. And the point remains that Japan was not capable of a mainland invasion. The point on intention is secondary. I'd say a Japanese land invasion of a close continental neighbour doesn't prove much about an opposed amphibious invasion across thousands of miles of ocean. It took Britain and her allies four years to put Overlord together, and that was only across a short stretch of the English Channel. Afraid I don't see how that follows.

Hear hear!

A serious question about the 'Guns against tyrannical government' argument - had the protestors at Kent State been armed, would they have been entitled to return fire on the National Guard?

You've no idea how extensive Joe's popgun collection is - and if we ever have to use it, I hope you'll be standing behind us rather than in front. Well, if that ever happens I'll probably be on the other side of the Atlantic, so whether I'm in front or behind might be somewhat academic. Incidentally, are Joe's popguns capable of shooting down jet aircraft or penetrating tank armour?

Really? You'd be wrong. Note the word capable. The Japanese had no capability and no intention of invading the mainland US, so Yamamoto's point is moot.

I'd imagine any power capable of successfully invading the US is not going to be deterred by Joe Public and his popgun.

Sounds like an argument for decent public healthcare...

Yes yes, but the real question is was it Clinton's fault in the first place?

Probably not enough information in that story to say anything with any great confidence, but I'd imagine there was probably at least as much wrong with the family as a whole as with 'the youth'; your average family argument doesn't end with 3 murders and an attempted 4th.

Prince Harry rejects 'hero' label http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7273129.stm Harry on his service: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_7270000/newsid_7273300?redirect=7273367.stm&news=1&bbram=1&nbwm=1&bbwm=1&nbram=1&asb=1

To be honest I was amazed the story stayed quiet for so long. Apparently it's been floating about on Australian websites since January! Was watching Channel 4 last night and was frankly a bit miffed to see Jon Snow whinging about this apparently being a sign of near-totalitarian press-muzzling. At one point Patrick Mercer MP (ex-Tory Security spokesman) came out with a great line, saying something like 'Harry's place is as a soldier on the battlefield killing and capturing his country's enemies' which I thought sounded fabulously anachronistic in a way that only a Tory can manage.

And, in a victory for multiculturalism and diversity, he's serving alongside Gurkhas - probably at once the scariest but also most decent and upstanding soldiers you could ever hope to meet. Here's to hoping he gets to finish his tour and comes back safe and sound. [Cheers, btw, for a relevant post]

Wow, 13 replies and only one of them about the topic of the original post...