[poet]

Point well taken. However, we have been told time and time again that this is war and to expect more warlike attacks. So, it is either a war or it is not.

The question could be resolved if Congress had an "on the floor" vote and defines "all" of the enemies instead of the "sense of congress" resolution they issued.
It seems to me that we are playing a semantic game here just like the liberal press is doing to protect the little rat traitor from treason charges. Is he an "illegal combatant" and, if so, why is he going to get a trial?

[nopardons]

War usually conotates aggression taken against a nation /s and its forces. The Barbary Pirates thingy, which was a war,was NOT declared a war by Congress, is the closest thing to fit what is going on today. Because this is all so different / new , we reall don't have an adequate word for it.

As to little Johnny Jihad, this is a sticky sitation.He is, by all lights, a TRAITOR. It just isn't really traitorous by legal language . Did you ever read " A MAN WITHOUT A COUNTRY " ? That's close, but no cigar. As a country, we really have not ever had this kind of a moronic traitor case before. It's all new territory .