Quote Originally Posted by Tribesman
Irrelevant if it is in the US criminal code or not ( terrorism is covered anyhow , though of course there will be problems over jurisdiction in these cases). The US is obliged to follow laws that it has agreed to .
You cannot determine if they are terrorists or POWs without a hearing , at a hearing they are entitled to a defense . As they are your prisoners you have to supply their defense . Its the law , do you have a problem with it ?
We are not talking about jailing or executing these people without a trial. We are talking about holding them for questioning and interrogation. POWs may be held for the duration of the conflict without access to legal counsel. They most certainly may not be abused and must be afforded the rights of the Geneva Convention, but by no means do they have any rights to access to the justice system. 'Irregular Hostiles' (again, for lack of the proper term) have even fewer rights and may or may not be covered by the Geneva Convetion.

Either way, they may be held without trial and without legal representation for the duration of the conflict. After this point they must be released or tried in open court for their crimes. The conflict is clearly still going on and as such we have not reached a point at which they are given access to the court system.

Quote Originally Posted by Kanamori
does this apply to someone who is simply detained in a war zone, or do they have be a combatent? it seems that being detained in a war zone is seperable from being a terrorist.
I do not know the answer to this.