You mean by restricting access to their oil? No other threat to the US has been proven.
:doh
Like I already addressed.
Your after the fact analysis doesn't count.
It was believed that he was a threat at the time.
That is all that matters.
What was bipartisan about almost every single Republican voting for the war, and a majority of Democrats voting against the war?
It is like you are living in denial.
The majority of Senate Democrats voted for it.
The actual numbers of Democrats voting for the legislation as well as co-sponsorship is enough to establish bipartisanship.
I have seen many of your posts. You are not this ignorant.
It is like you have some bias that overrides any rational thought on our Military power lead and where much of that comes from.
We cut back spending, we will be cutting back funding of projects. We will see a brain drain.
We cut back our Military lead will eventually start seeing more belligerence and actual hostilities towards us.
It's like you want to hinder our country, in favor of what you want to be progressive, such as UHC/Obamacare.
For the sake of our Country and it's people we need to be more concerned with maintaining any lead we have and developing others, instead of supporting those individuals who can not support themselves. Because that leads nowhere fast.
Of all the industrialized countries, why should only America be the only nation to only provide partial health care to its people?
Really?
That is what you got? Crying because we don't have what harms other nations?
**** that makes people suffer more.
UHC both provides better results and lower costs, as has been documented.
No it doesn't.
The only better results are for those who never provided for themselves.