>>
Please note that the court will NOT act retroactively - only on war crimes commited after the court is approved.>
>So why the US are against it?
>
>The only thing that comes to my mind is that I have to agree with what Len Speed posted in his message #
764743:
"So the US wants to be the world's policeman, fighting to uphold international laws, but not having the inconvenience of being hampered by being bound by those laws.".
It certainly looks as if this is the attitude - and a very dangerous attitude, IMO.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)