If it's a "war on terrorism" the first thing is to stop the people you actually command acting as terrorists.

That at least ought to be common ground between us. There is room for dispute as to whether some action might be war crime or not, but there can be no disagreement that war crimes ought to be prveneted and oubnished, whoever commits them.

The International War Crimes Trubunal only exists to try war crimes where the counties concerned are unable or unwilling to deal with them. By refusing to accede to this court form its own citizens the USA has in effect pledge that it will carry out its of bringing to trial any of its citizens reasonably accused of such crimes, and punishing them appropriately, if they are found guilty.

This would, of course, in any case, have meant that the International War Crimes Tribunal would not have been involved, even if it did have jurisdiction.

In the past, notably in the case of Vietnam the United States has on many people's eyes failed to act in this way. No doubt it will do better in future, and will fulfil this important duty. And it would seem to me that any patriotic American would see it that way, and would see this as one of the ways in which America can give the rest of the world a good example of how a democracy can function.