[goldstategop]

Its not enough. A future President sympathetic to the ICC can simply cease asking for an exemption. Congress has to write a ban of the ICC's jurisdiction on ANY American into law so another President won't be able to claim that America's abeyance from the ICC Treaty was just a policy decision of his predecessor.

[knak]

Its not enough. A future President sympathetic to the ICC can simply cease asking for an exemption. Congress has to write a ban of the ICC's jurisdiction on ANY American into law so another President won't be able to claim that America's abeyance from the ICC Treaty was just a policy decision of his predecessor.

My thoughts exactly. I said that to my husband last night. Something needs to be done here to stop Hillary or Al or whoever the next dem president is from joining up with the ICC or conveniently forgeting to renew the extension. Total immunity was my first choice.

But apparently a lot of folks here think we are just either not reading and comprehending the story or we are looking to bash Bush. I read it and completely understand the story. I want the US to have safeguards in place. Not just a "renewable" agreement. I realize this could be the first step in doing that also; to keep allies happy.

I'm glad someone agrees with me.