Battlefield Nation Forums - View Single Post

Mad Monk · 04-30-2004, 02:46 AM

I believe the man said the topic was:

"Pro action in Iraq
VS
Anti action in Iraq"

Not, pro Bush gov't or not.

Aaaanywaayyyy,

I'm for the action. I think it needed to be done for many reasons (and regardless of the existence of WMDs). The regime needed changing and we're getting it done (we meaning the U.S. and others). Granted, there have been some rough spots, but I think it will turn out better in the end.

I hate to see our soldiers dying as much as anyone else, but I refuse to believe that they are dying in vain. I firmly believe that "Joe Iraqi" wants this over with as much as we do and that most of the trouble is being caused by external terrorist groups that have nothing to lose by fighting and everything to lose if we succeed. I think we can't afford to not win this thing.

04-30-2004, 02:46 AM	#9 (permalink)
Mad Monk Major Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: O-O-O-O-Oklahoma, where the wind comes sweeping down the plain. Posts: 3,045	I believe the man said the topic was: "Pro action in Iraq VS Anti action in Iraq" Not, pro Bush gov't or not. Aaaanywaayyyy, I'm for the action. I think it needed to be done for many reasons (and regardless of the existence of WMDs). The regime needed changing and we're getting it done (we meaning the U.S. and others). Granted, there have been some rough spots, but I think it will turn out better in the end. I hate to see our soldiers dying as much as anyone else, but I refuse to believe that they are dying in vain. I firmly believe that "Joe Iraqi" wants this over with as much as we do and that most of the trouble is being caused by external terrorist groups that have nothing to lose by fighting and everything to lose if we succeed. I think we can't afford to not win this thing. __________________