Any Decent Republicans Out There?

I too must not be a "decent" republican for I have no intention of calling for Bush's impeachment.

" . . . for launching an illegal war . . . "

Okay okay, I'm sure you're all decent people almost most of the time almostly, please let me rephrase it.
Is there any Republicans out there bothered enough to at least denounce what Cheney & co did.
If you're not and you're just too busy getting on with life to be arsed about it. So be it. I can half understand that.
If you agree with what they did, that I don't understand and good luck with your conscience.

So they stampeded the gullible among the voting population, too.

I 'm trying to figure out
by WHAT REASONING a war can be "illegal", Yankee ???

By Marjorie Cohn
Afghanistan: The Other Illegal War

The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was every bit as illegal as the invasion of Iraq. Why, then, do so many Americans see it as justifiable?

...

The U.N. Charter provides that all member states must settle their international disputes by peaceful means, and no nation can use military force except in self-defense or when authorized by the Security Council. After the 9/11 attacks, the council passed two resolutions, neither of which authorized the use of military force in Afghanistan. Resolutions 1368 and 1373 condemned the Sept. 11 attacks and ordered the freezing of assets; the criminalizing of terrorist activity; the prevention of the commission of and support for terrorist attacks; and the taking of necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist activity, including the sharing of information. In addition, it urged ratification and enforcement of the international conventions against terrorism.

The invasion of Afghanistan was not legitimate self-defense under article 51 of the charter because the attacks on Sept. 11 were criminal attacks, not "armed attacks" by another country. Afghanistan did not attack the United States. In fact, 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, there was not an imminent threat of an armed attack on the United States after Sept. 11, or Bush would not have waited three weeks before initiating his October 2001 bombing campaign. The necessity for self-defense must be "instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation." This classic principle of self-defense in international law has been affirmed by the Nuremberg Tribunal and the U.N. General Assembly.

Bush's justification for attacking Afghanistan was that it was harboring Osama bin Laden and training terrorists. Iranians could have made the same argument to attack the United States after they overthrew the vicious Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1979 and he was given safe haven in the United States. The people in Latin American countries whose dictators were trained in torture techniques at the School of the Americas could likewise have attacked the torture training facility in Fort Benning, Ga., under that specious rationale. Those who conspired to hijack airplanes and kill thousands of people on 9/11 are guilty of crimes against humanity. They must be identified and brought to justice in accordance with the law. But retaliation by invading Afghanistan is not the answer and will only lead to the deaths of more of our troops and Afghans.

http://www.alternet.org/story/93473/afghanistan%3A_the_other_illegal_war

I remain skeptical that there is any law against war.

Dosent anyone realize you cant impeach him. He is no longer president. Talk about wasting time and money for nothing.

The Startling Size of US Military Operations in Africa
The Pentagon's Africa Command will tell you there's one military base on the entire continent. Don't believe them.
—By Nick Turse | Fri Sep. 6, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

They're involved in Algeria and Angola, Benin and Botswana, Burkina Faso and Burundi, Cameroon and the Cape Verde Islands. And that's just the ABCs of the situation. Skip to the end of the alphabet and the story remains the same: Senegal and the Seychelles, Togo and Tunisia, Uganda and Zambia. From north to south, east to west, the Horn of Africa to the Sahel, the heart of the continent to the islands off its coasts, the US military is at work. Base construction, security cooperation engagements, training exercises, advisory deployments, special operations missions, and a growing logistics network, all undeniable evidence of expansion—except at US Africa Command.

To hear AFRICOM tell it, US military involvement on the continent ranges from the miniscule to the microscopic. The command is adamant that it has only a single "military base" in all of Africa: Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti. The head of the command insists that the US military maintains a "small footprint" on the continent. AFRICOM's chief spokesman has consistently minimized the scope of its operations and the number of facilities it maintains or shares with host nations, asserting that only "a small presence of personnel who conduct short-duration engagements" are operating from "several locations" on the continent at any given time.

With the war in Iraq over and the conflict in Afghanistan winding down, the US military is deploying its forces far beyond declared combat zones. In recent years, for example, Washington has very publicly proclaimed a "pivot to Asia," a "rebalancing" of its military resources eastward, without actually carrying out wholesale policy changes. Elsewhere, however, from the Middle East to South America, the Pentagon is increasingly engaged in shadowy operations whose details emerge piecemeal and are rarely examined in a comprehensive way. Nowhere is this truer than in Africa. To the media and the American people, officials insist the US military is engaged in small-scale, innocuous operations there. Out of public earshot, officers running America's secret wars say: "Africa is the battlefield of tomorrow, today."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/us-military-bases-africa

For those of us who want to see justice, who want to see the same criteria applied to the US as it applies elsewhere, there's always the Hague and that's where Bush, Cheney & co should be.

Quote:
For those of us who want to see justice, who want to see the same criteria applied to the US as it applies elsewhere, there's always the Hague and that's where Bush, Cheney & co should be.

I thought you were a legal eagle Dave,
so I'm sure you're aware of International law, maybe not.

The Security Council voted against the war in 2003
so under the UN Charter that made going to war in Iraq illegal.

I remain skeptical that there is any law against war.

Would moral law ever cross your mind.

If there's no law against war and invading other countries was legal then what was Desert Storm all about.
I mean if it wasn't illegal for Saddam to invade Kuwait, why did we bother with Desert Storm.

That Florida sun going to your head Dave,

you know maybe a good brisk walk through the Everglades would clear your head.

American sovereignty cannot be compromised

Dosent anyone realize you cant impeach him. He is no longer president.
Talk about wasting time and money for nothing.