In LOAC, there is no distinction of 'enemy combatant'. Only the three I listed. Without a state sponsor, anyone engaged in war activities is an unlawful combatant.
I have no doubt, that the folks engaged against us are either cooperating with a foreign power, or more likely a supranational organization. Either of which makes them unlawful combatants. The beauty of LOAC is that members of this cabal that are outside of CONUS but engaged in the war activities are not required to be apprehended and can be killed wherever they are found.
That is very beautiful.
I bitterly hate that “Unlawful”business, though. It’s a term more suitable for thinking of civilian court and all constitutional protections.
“Enemy combatants” is so perfect for more easily kicking these Treason cases into a Tribunal and a more deadly serious address of these cases, in customary manner guaranteed to muster justice equal to their treasonous deeds. (No more Amy Barrett jury fixers.)
The Hamby Case I have not yet reviewed that generated the Supreme Court assent to trying civilians as Enemy combatants. I know you’re correct about the LOAC.