I think that's a pretty absurd argument. Like some sort of weird variation of fallacious slippery slope. So because someone is for international treaties on war

I think that's a pretty absurd argument. Like some sort of weird variation of fallacious slippery slope. So because someone is for international treaties on war crime he must be for global taxation rates? Would it be ridiculous to not just support a full on global government then since we already have bodies governing war crimes? That lazy line of thinking can be used for pretty much everything