But having the kind of power Clark does means that he's going to be faced with some ugly decisions. If the leader of a nation is ordering genocide, for example, can Clark in good conscience sit by and allow it to go on WITHOUT doing something?
Clark definitely shouldn't sit by while genocide was being committed. Which is why I absolutely would have wanted him to intervene in Rwanda in 1994 or in Haditha in the Kurdish part of Iraq in 1988. It was Saddam who committed genocide in Haditha, so intervening in 1988 to have him removed from power would have been totally justified. It would have been okay to press for him to be put on trial for his crimes against humanity many years later, too. Just as long as you accuse him of the things that he is actually guilty of, not remove him from power because of the crimes he may commit in the future.
Ann
