Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by manu1959, Feb 21, 2009.
Politics News - Obama backs Bush: No rights for Bagram prisoners
Hmm, kinda goes with this, who would have thought? :
The article is a little misleading. The Obama administration's rationale is different than the Bush administration's.
The Bush administration logic was based more on the principle that terrorists are "illegal combatants" that are not subject to due process whether detained in Afghanistan, Cuba or even in the US.
The Obama administration logic is based more on the principle that whether terrorists or uniformed enemy soldiers, applying due process in a combat zone doesn't make sense. Otherwise, we'd have soldiers obtaining search warrants before conducting a raid, advising enemy combatants of their rights to an attorney, etc. For those of us who have touched the elephant, this is a multi-dimensionally stupid idea on so many levels. Combat zones are very unique. The Obama administration's logic holds water.
I can see the consistency of the Obama administration's logic that if a captured enemy is removed from a combat zone and taken to an area under US control, then the civilian principles of law begin to take precedence over those of military law. I see no contradiction here, and this is more consistent with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Geneva Conventions and other international agreements.
of course ..... of course ...... so if he just moves all the folks from gitmo to afganistan it will all be ok with you......
Separate names with a comma.