1) Michael Ratner has his own page:
http://www.humanrightsnow.org/
2) On WWII analogy, see the Tim Wise article I've posted.
On the contempt US leaders have for international law, see Phyllis Bennis - Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today's UN (Interlink, 2000) and Noam Chomsky - Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs (South End Press, 2000).
http://www.interlinkbooks.com/
3) On non-UN "international tribunals":
"James Shea, when asked about the possibility of NATO liability in news conferences in news conferences in May 1999...replied that "NATO is the friend of the Tribunal...NATO countries are those that have provided the finances to set up the Tribunal, we are among the majority financiers". He was "certain" that the Prosecutor would only indict "people of Yugoslav nationality". - A New Generation Draws the Line: Kosovo, East Timor, and the Standards of the West - Noam Chomsky (Verso, 2000), p. 132.
See also the chapter "War Crimes" by Mirjana Skoco and William Woodger in Degraded Capability: The Media and the Kosovo Crisis - ed. Philip Hammond and Edward Herman (Pluto, 2000):
MP
> > Maybe the UN Charter can be amended to read, "prohibits the
>>use of force, unless David Rieff and Christopher Hitchens say
>it's
>>humanitarian". - MP
>
>
>heh. What's the date on this article? Is there a link to Znet or
>somewhere?
>
>>We will not here describe in detail the policy reasons as to why
>the
>>use of military force is inadvisable. Others have addressed this
>>issue at length. Suffice it to say that military force 1) kills
>>civilians; 2) has the potential to destabilize countries such as
>>Pakistan; 3) widens the divide between the United States and
>Islamic
>>nations; 4) sews the seeds of future terrorism; and 5) will not
>make
>>us or anyone in the world safer.
>
>#5 depends on the situation. In the war on fascism during WWII,
>military force made the world safer. I thought Hitchens has said
>he
>would like to see an international tribunal set up and therefore
>agrees
>to some degree with Ratner. #4 makes little sense to me. It's
>like
>saying if you fight and antagonize capitalists, you sow the seeds
>for
>future capitalism. Obviously, the capitalists are already angry
>with you;
>you simply fight the next crop, too.
>
>Peter
--