Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

pritchke · 07-03-2003, 03:19 PM

I think it is the "bring 'em on" phrase that people are being critical about.

While no one disagrees with punishing those who try to upset the peace.
The "Bring em' on" statement sounds as if he wants people to attack American troops. He obviously does not have any close relatives over there that mean anything to him or he would not have said such a thing. Daring people to attack incites more people to do so.

Personally I saw his speech and I liked it up to the very last part. I believe he was getting a little emotional towards the end like he was going to cry.

He should have said something like "We prefer it if you did not attack coalition troops, but if you do we will use whatever means necessary to stop you. (Implying death)" That should have been the end of it. Bring 'em on means a whole different meaning.

So for all those who disagree "Bring 'em on" [img]graemlins/knightsmile.gif[/img]

07-03-2003, 03:19 PM	#4
pritchke Bastet - Egyptian Cat Goddess Join Date: September 5, 2001 Location: Calgary, AB Age: 50 Posts: 3,491	I think it is the "bring 'em on" phrase that people are being critical about. While no one disagrees with punishing those who try to upset the peace. The "Bring em' on" statement sounds as if he wants people to attack American troops. He obviously does not have any close relatives over there that mean anything to him or he would not have said such a thing. Daring people to attack incites more people to do so. Personally I saw his speech and I liked it up to the very last part. I believe he was getting a little emotional towards the end like he was going to cry. He should have said something like "We prefer it if you did not attack coalition troops, but if you do we will use whatever means necessary to stop you. (Implying death)" That should have been the end of it. Bring 'em on means a whole different meaning. So for all those who disagree "Bring 'em on" [img]graemlins/knightsmile.gif[/img]