Appeals Court Orders Enemy Combatant Free by Military

what does it mean to be a terrorist? If you are fighting under the Taliban are you a terrorist - or a religious zealot army volunteer?

A guy with a gun who wants to shoot up Americans probably isn't a terrorist. Just a POW. Could some of those guys be used in terrorist plots? Probably...but so could 10,000 other psyho's running around Afganistan.

Point isn't that they should just be released and set free. The should be sent back to their home and let the gov't there decide what to do with them. The idea that after numerous years of being imprisoned that they have any useful information is ridiculous. They have no knowledge. They are merely POW's now.

 

Well, we know that I at least clicked reply before you edited since my post quotes your quote pre-edit. We only have your assertion that your edit happened before I hit reply.

But I'm a glass half full kinda guy so...

What does fighting under the Taliban have to do with this guy? He was arrested IN the US.

 

secret prisons does not mean torture.

 

Then why are they secret?

 

sorry, but a secret prison is not automatically torture. If you think torture is going on there, that is one thing, but that 1st statement is true,,,secret prison does not automatically mean torture is being done.

thats my point. Nothing is torture to me? really? Wow, i learned something new about myself.

 

Seriously insane man! How can you argue with that logic?

 

lol.

you dont care then why did you respond. thats always a good conversation starter and really opens things up..."i dont care".


implying one thing means another, when it does not, is always cute as well...but you dont care so its all good

 

That's your opinion, not fact. I think this thread shows that many people don't even get that far in their analysis.

Giving an Al Qaeda attorney a security clearance doesn't really solve the problem.

 

Well, here's the difference. Court-martials are set up to provide a level of protection for the military. There isn't a way for outside influences like the media to get in and find out what's going on. And as for the trial itself, all involved would be members of the military, including the attorney who would be part of something like a JAG unit. (similar to how the military commissions work)

The big difference is that court martials actually have standards for evidence, unlike the military commissions. Also, the defense is guaranteed fundamental rights like the ability to review the evidence. Now I know you'll say that presents the possibility of an intelligence leak but at some point there's a limit. Everyone in the room is part of the military except the defense who's being held so it's not like he can really leak anything.

Court-martials, in my opinion, provide a reasonable balance for both sides.

 

c'mon pgab, why'd you back down....your back and forth was fun. you could have come back with, "Ya, but my post doesn't have an 'Last Edited By' tagline, and yours was 9 minutes after mine, so clearly I had finished my edit before you finished youre reply!"

let's try and keep this spat going!

 

Seems reasonable. Can you court martial a civilian?

 

i really hope your joking.

 

He is.