Whoa. There are graphs and stuff in this discussion... I can't compete with that. But, since the prime movers in the pertinent lifts are 3rd class levers, a longer bone would decrease the mechanical advantage around the joint, which would necesitate a stronger force from the muscle fibers to move the same load. So if we use the stupid, traditional "contractile potential" measure, I guess the taller guy would be stronger because the muscle fibers have to pull harder on the less mechanically advantageous limb. But if we use the "practical application of force" argument you could either say that the taller guy is moving the same load farther, which may or may not be "more practical," or you could say that the smaller guy, who's contractile potential is less, is getting a higher ratio out of the contractile potential/practical application of force.
Don't lifting meets have some method of determining the strongest athletes by body weight? Does that have any impact to this discussion?