David Bernstein discusses:

I'm not exaggerating when I say that I've had several correspondences along these lines, none challenging the points I raised (though not necessarily assenting, either), but simply arguing that any such points are completely irrelevant, because all that matters is whether or not Israel violated international law.

It has struck me that debating such people is just as frustrating and unproductive as arguing with a religious believer about some matter within the scope of his religious belief--just substitute "God says so" for "international law says so."

I'm often amazed at how many people don't have a clue what the "Geneva Conventions" actually say; eventhough they are often brought up as one of the various "International Laws".

I will always support the US not adopting or signing the treaty on "International Criminal Courts".