<...There was a broad consensus, here and abroad, that the genocide and racial-cleansing which accompanied the break-up of Yugoslavia had to stop, else it might lead to a broader conflagration in the Balkans, and/or a stream of displaced refugees flooding across Central Europe.

...there's no credible evidence that a majority of the Iraqis want Saddam out, and even if they did, the fact remains that we do not have the right to oust the dictator. Everyone calling for this kind of pre-emptive, essentially unilateral strike against a sovereign nation always fails to consider that a bad precedent is being set, and that someday, the tables may be turned...I'm still waiting for someone to explain how the United States got the right to determine who rules which country.



Are you even listening to yourself? Regime change in Yugoslavia, yes, but not regime change in Iraq. Do you want to compare numbers of innocents killed in Bosnia with those in Iraq? Do you want to compare expansionism? Numbers of refugees? Which of the two leaders had a history of developing weapons of mass destruction?

Is it that there was a "consensus" in Yugoslavia? Do you make all your decisions by whether or not you can get a "consensus" on them? Or again, is it just who's running the show that makes all the difference?

A little history here and here for those of you still open to facts.