Thursday, April 21, 2011

An' So's Yer Old Man!

In an  FDL post on a largely unrelated topic of the perils of pursuing accused terrorists with trials before military commissions, I found this excerpt interesting:

Aha, but isn’t al Nashiri an “unlawful combatant?” No he’s not. In fact, the Obama administration has rightly deep-sixed the Bush-era term “unlawful enemy combatant,” for Guantanamo detainees, replacing it with “unprivileged enemy belligerent.” This is consistent with a recognition that under the laws of war, participation in hostilities by civilians is not “unlawful.” Since military commissions may only take up crimes in violation of the laws of war, everything charged in connection with the Cole attack would be out the window, with the possible exception of perfidy.‬‪ ‬‪
Emphasis mine. Bush's "unlawful enemy combatant" passes from the dialog, and I had only just gotten accustomed to the phrase. I don't know that I like "unprivileged enemy belligerent" any better; it still seems to make a lot of assumptions about things that IMHO it would take a trial to prove. But asking Obama to grant combatants due process according to international standards is like, well, it's like asking him to follow up on his promises... don't hold your breath.

No comments:

Post a Comment


• Click here to view existing comments.
• Or enter your new rhyme or reason
in the new comment box here.
• Or click the first Reply link below an existing
comment or reply and type in the
new reply box provided.
• Scrolling manually up and down the page
is also OK.

Static Pages (About, Quotes, etc.)

No Police Like H•lmes