This is the third exchange on this topic and you still have not grasped the point:
Why would Bush withdraw Clinton's signature it had no force of law? Remember: GBII was concerned with that other nations would arrest and hold American soldiers abroad on charges pursuant to international law. It's still a problem.
Remember that whole business about Milosevic's trial? Remember how many times over the last fifteen years you've heard about pulling chief executives of nations onto the ICC carpet? Remember how there was some concern Bubba might be forced to testify, or be charged himself for our illegal war in Kosovo? These were all attempts to establish legal precedent. They have failed, but we did come close.
Change in the executive branch brings about change in what parts of what unratified treaties are adhered to, to the extent the executive branch has or can usurp the authority to do so.
Incorrect. It leads to change in how they are interpreted, as does subsequent rulings from whatever "secretariat" is pursuant to said treaty. Moreover, it is much more to devolve a power once it has been usurped. If this power comes to gun regulation, well, I defy you to determine how reversible that is.
As I said, it’s up to the whimsy of the executive branch, and no where near as cut-and-dried as you make it.
Except for the State Department bureaucracy Bush never fired. It's been continuous for nearly 20 years. So have the bureaucracies of Federal resource agencies, which now include their own police forces including SWAT teams, even the Park Service has them.
As to regulating carbon, note the EPA claiming the authority to regulate it as a pollutant only came about since the SCOTUS ruling to that effect. Although the trading market did fail (Kyoto), this government has been committed to reduction in carbon emissions since Bubba's scrawl on that document and that condition has not changed.
And unintended gun grabber venues.
When we buy a car in Texas, it has to be compliant with the California Air Resources Board's emissions requirements. Why? Because it was too expensive to keep building California emissions cars and "other" versions. So they just do them all at the strict standard and bring the cost down. exactly as the CARB hoped.
So Fedex is an international company. If they want an easy time in international trade, then they have to comply with international regulators in Brussels and NYC. Do they want to threaten all their international business due to a charge of assisting interstate (or cross border illicit Texas traffickers) arms trades? No. They just politely refuse all gun shipments everywhere. Done deal.
Yeah. Slippery slopes are so common now that nobody cares I guess.