Dear me all that googling and you've still managed to miss the point! Must've taken you a long time though...A- for effort. I'm sure you learned a lot about trans-national law and international conventions.
What is the point of international law and the rule of law if the Americans (or anyone else powerful enough) can ignore it at will?
Try reading the question again old bean. Where is the court, and who presides? Surely if you were, as you claim, referring to the UN Charter rather than acting in a state of blithe ignorance as I suspect then you would know that any resolution harming the United State's interests would simply be vetoed?
But what I was referring to was the UN Charter (one of the conventions referred to above and also accepted by 'custom') which certainly enjoys the force of international law.
How so? The five permanent members of the security council have a veto on any action contrary to their interests. Hardly enjoying any force whatsoever would be a better phrasing. No force of international law here.
Indeed as I pointed out to you earlier in the thread the ultimate arbiter between states is still military power, the UN you appear to put such faith in is merely an expensive talking shop, just like the league of nations before it. Sorry if you dont like it.
I hate to be picky, in fact as I havn't showered today I'll allow you grubby, but I hope you can back up your claims that I am a racist. Nice to see that someone has read my profile though
.