Afghanistan: The Spending Spree Prevails

Well, as always sir, you've made me think about this a bit. I'm trying to read between the lines of your metaphoric paragraph. Are you insinuating they won't stand a fair trial? The difference between them getting a fair trial with potentially multi-cultural jurors of lay people, and a cohort of military judges and officers as the jury, I'd say the civilian jury is going to produce a better chance for impartiality then the military judges. As for moving them around the globe, the US has a veritable shuttle service from the middle east back home, so I don't see that being an issue. Also, to further contest the ease of the maneuver, I'm VERY sure that convening civilian courts with daily presiding judges costs the tax payers less than convening military courts. Either way though, we're paying for our own retribution.

As for them not being American citizens, well, you're right, of course. They are not American citizens. The article refers to them as "foreign terrorists". However, our legal system is based around a common law of man. Our civilian legal system doesn't look at race or religion when prosecuting. (or at least they're not supposed to...) I don't see why someone believing in Sharia Law means they should be tried in court any differently. Also, Sharia is interpreted differently by Muslims whether they're modernists, traditionalists, or fundamentalists, so I really hope you're not saying that all foreign Muslims are disqualified from due process.

Also, you don't think that reclassifying "foreign terrorists" as an even harsher sounding "enemy combatants" and THEN throwing our standards for our own citizens aside in favor of military tribunals for Muslims will even further sour other nations on our practices???

Look man, there's a reason why Gitmo was supposed to be closed. It's a hate machine. The more other countries' citizens end up there without legitimate legal rights, the more their sons and grandsons start picking up a saif and screaming "Death to America"!!!

WHOA. I agree with just about all of that except on one HUGE point.

Trial all enemy combatants caught on a foreign battlefield in our domestic courts?? Are you really understanding what you are asking for here? That would be like shipping home every Japanese soldier caught during Iwo Jima...so some Jihadist over there blows up a Humvee, comes screaming out of a building letting loose on a Kalishnikov, by some miracle survives and is taken prisoner...and you want him shipped back home to stand trial? When, when, and how exactly?

These people are NOT American citizens. They don't believe in our Democracy or even our system of law(they believe is Sharia).

I have to think you just didn't think that one through, I certainly hope so because otherwise I think it's absurd. They are prisoners of war, not American citizens being accused of a crime and innocent until proven guilty.

--Much to my chagrin, news rolled in today that the vote to speed up Afghan withdrawal fell just shy. Although, the headline is sunnier then the contents, buyer beware. Not only did Congress vote to retain large scale military presence in Afghanistan, it also appropriated billions to large scale MIC projects. (MIC = military industrial complex)

I have no other way than to just show you this list and see if you agree with my chagrin:

Among the policies approved as part of the bill were:

-- A provision requiring that "foreign terrorists" detained by the United States be considered enemy combatants and tried in military tribunals rather than the civilian court system.

-- A move to keep alive an alternate engine being developed by General Electric Co (GE.N). and Rolls-Royce Group Plc (RR.L) for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which was eliminated by the Pentagon in a cost-cutting move.

-- Conditions that would link implementation of the New START nuclear arms treaty with Russia to completion of the next generation of U.S. nuclear production facilities, which will not be finished until the mid-2020s.

-- A proposal to eliminate the U.S. Institute of Peace, a congressionally funded institution that works to stabilize fragile states and end conflicts like the one in Afghanistan.

For those of you keeping score, that's:
-- Showing the world that our civilian courts are good enough for our criminals but not foreign criminals.
-- Hey, this seems okay! Alternative ener...gines. Damn, almost.
-- War room deals to assure our nuclear superiority
-- eliminating peace

If I was going to eliminate peace, those would probably be the first few steps I would take also.

But hey, I was plenty pleased to see us standing firm on this:

A vote to bar U.S. troops on the ground in Libya passed nearly unanimously.