I thought the official U.S. position is the ICC is not a valid entity. If that is the case, then why would the U.S. do this? Wouldn't this imply that the U.S. sanctions the ICC and by corollary would agree to be held bound by its rulings. I guess there will be a whole mess of current and former U.S. gov't officials that will be brought up on charges at the ICC within the next few months.

Edit: Looks like the article I originally linked to cannot be read completely unless you are a subscriber to the WSJ. I replaced the article with one very close to it where Australia requests the same thing as the Obama admin. Sorry.
http://www.rttnews.com/Content/GeneralNe...37020&SM=1

(06-17-2011 02:44 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I guess there will be a whole mess of current and former U.S. gov't officials that will be brought up on charges at the ICC within the next few months.

Maybe that's what the left wants are using Assange as a pawn. The left has wanted the "Rethuglican BFEE" tried, convicted, and executed for years now.