<p>It means that at least one former President of the United States, a Democratic one, is likely guilty of war crimes, and headed what had become an “outlaw” state. That’s how it was understood by much of the international community, and (in strange quirks of fate) what precipitated the Oil for Food Program.</p>
<p>Some facts on the UN imposed sanctions and the results. The death number is much smaller and much more convoluted. Maybe you need to keep up with history–it is still being written.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.reason.com/0203/fe.mw.the.shtml[/url]”>http://www.reason.com/0203/fe.mw.the.shtml</a></p>
<p>barrons, thanks for the link that provides a balanced view.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that Mini continues his/her crusade based on dubious figures as if he/she is the ultimate humanitarian but then waves off the carnage in Vietnam after Congress refused to enforce the peace treaty infractions by N Vietnam as “well both sides were bad”. This indifference to human life continues in Iraq where he/she has stated where he/she is willing to let the country devolve into civil war with countless more fatalities - just as long as we aren’t involved.</p>
<p>What would Jesus do?</p>
<p>The more pragmatic question is whether the U.S. should operate on the same moral level as those who use terrorism as their tool. 90 members of the U.S. Senate said “No.” George Bush and FF say “Yes.” I know which version of the United States of America I prefer to live in.</p>
<p>Gee TD, thanks for clarifying my position - even though I never stated it. I guess you are using the same powers of clairvoyance that you use in most of your other assertions.</p>
<p>Your position is pretty well circumscribed by the arguments you make.</p>
<p>Gee I didn’t know that I made any arguments. I questioned the references to the Geneva convention and War Crimes Act as to their applicability (which they are not) and stated that that was the reason for the current debate in Congress. So, where are my arguments?</p>
<p>I find it amazing that this can even be a point of contention. It is OUTRAGEOUS the underhanded and disgusting things this (and other) U.S. administrations have done in the name of the American People. There should be NO torture allowed, Period. It is a matter of morals and values, and doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do. (and Bush calls himself a Christian… )</p>
<p>Alan Dershowitz is lots smarter than you and he finds it OK in certain circumstances and he is not a Christian. So it can be debated by smart people.</p>