Are Democrats also guilty of waging aggressive war?

That charge, is of course, one of the counts of war crimes that many left-liberals would like to lay at the feet of President Bush. (I personally can see that the charge has legal merit, and I'm definitely no fan of American exceptionalism. Yet, I must admit, that I would be quite hesitant before wanting to cross that precipice.)

Anyway, if Bush is guilty, what about Congressional Democrats? Many have voted against at least the most recent supplemental Defense Department appropriation, but many others have not.

Beyond the “support the troops” blather which many pro-war financing Democrats use to cover their tracks and backsides, it’s arguable that their continued support does aid and abet this war. The minor premise of this syllogism is that with the Libby indictment, Democrats have no excuses left.

Ergo, if President George W. Bush is allegedly to be guilty of waging aggressive war, in its technical international law sense, then about 200 Democratic Senators and Representatives are legally guilty of aiding and abetting that aggressive war.

Now, they can bargain their support in exchange for a timetable or other concrete indications from Bush that he moving to wind down our involvement in Iraq; that would certainly be a reasonable transition away from the war. But nothing short of that will do.