The question is whether or not defendants in military tribunals can be charged with crimes which aren't illegal under the laws of war, like conspiracy.
The administration says yes, but BG Mark Martins the chief prosecutor, says no and it's created a schism within the Obama administration. The fear of the military is reciprocity; if we get away with it, other nations will do it to our soldiers. The administration, following the lead of the Bush administration, favors expediency.
Of course, Congress hasn't helped by denying civilian trials in federal courts.
Personally? I side with BG Martin's on this one. The law says what it says and it's a dangerous precedent to expand upon that just because we want to.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/s...?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130127&_r=0
The administration says yes, but BG Mark Martins the chief prosecutor, says no and it's created a schism within the Obama administration. The fear of the military is reciprocity; if we get away with it, other nations will do it to our soldiers. The administration, following the lead of the Bush administration, favors expediency.
Of course, Congress hasn't helped by denying civilian trials in federal courts.
Personally? I side with BG Martin's on this one. The law says what it says and it's a dangerous precedent to expand upon that just because we want to.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/s...?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130127&_r=0
