President Clinton is going to have to tell me truthfully and completely a lot more than he has so far to justify his actions as more than political terrorism.
If the war in Vietnam was so immoral as to justify evading the draft, my legal reading of what he did, then how in the world can he claim his actions in Sudan and Afghanistan were moral?
If he remembers Somalia, as I do, then he must recall, despite his seemingly poor memory, that the bodies of American Rangers were horribly desecrated by being dragged through the streets at the end of a rope. That act apparently did not rate retribution.
He would have us believe he had credible evidence to justify his aggression. Its timing, too? That is hard to believe. Not if Hillary's claim that Ken Starr's investigation lacked credible evidence and was part of a right-wing conspiracy.
Albert K. Hill Buffalo