Skip to main content

View Diary: Defense Department Backs Indefinite Preventive Detention of ACQUITTED Detainees (115 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Completely absurd reference. (0+ / 0-)

    It has always been legal under international law to detain enemy combatants.  Germans were not tried at Nuremberg for holding American soldiers in detention camps.

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 08:31:24 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong. You can hold POWs until (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ewmorr

      the end of hostilities and then you must release them.

      The term "enemy combatant" has been all over the map.  It was not until World War II that the executive branch designation of "enemy combatant" was officially coined, and back then it was for individuals suspected of committing offenses in the United States.

      The Canary in the Coalmine is available for purchase at patriotictruthteller.net

      by Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 08:37:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Okay, when hostilities between the US and the (0+ / 0-)

        Taliban/AQ end then there will be no legal authority for detaining the Gitmo chaps as combatants.

        Then they'll have to be tried or released.

        "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

        by Geekesque on Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 08:40:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wholly unfeasible (0+ / 0-)

          The "War on Terror" is merely a concept.  Under what criteria does the "War on Terror" end?  

          You're proposal is akin to saying that those being held in U.S. jails must be detained until the "War on Crime" is over.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site