So you are saying that USA is entitled to act with criminal intent and it has no one to answer to? If that is the case, why should it be a trusted entity at all as a nation which claims human rights and democratic rights and abiding by laws?

What you will see with a general read of the criticisms in the wiki are indications of bias and several nations in Africa and South America annulling the ICC influence.

The U.S. had peripheral involvement in these actions.

I am upvoting you, as I don't find your line of questioning abrasive enough to warrant down votes.

Well there is always bias but that is not just about bias but having an entity above nation state that can provide a ruling on wrong doings. For example, the most powerful nation on earth occupying some country to extract its resources without any entity than can do anything about it, is criminal wrong doing. Yes there is going to be bias but not if they are providing the evidence.

I am not talking about the current ethnic conflict between Israel and Palestinians because that is a century worth of conflict has gone far beyond what courts can rule on. I am talking about USA absolving itself from being accountable in presence of evidence.