Where did I say that these non-combatants shall be treated `better´ than regular POW?? Well, many there are kept in prison for 4 years. There must be some evidence that these people are dangerous. Otherwise, they wouldn´t be there, right? So why don´t you judge them? Or is the evidence not sufficient. The west doesn´t know how to deal with these terrorists properly. Your way isn´t right, that´s what we feel, because it could lead to unjust results, and our way (treating them like normal criminals) isn´t right either, because we often lack evidence and must release them. There must be a right way, or not?!?
Are you incapable of understanding the point that we are not obligated to try people while we are at war with them?
Why should we judge terrorist under our laws that gives them US citizens protections,when they arent even covered by the geneva convention?
Those at Gitmo have been interrogated and some have been invaluable sources of information about planned attacks on the US, etc.. The problem is we are at war, and the uniform the enemy wears is flip-flops and a hood or towel over his head. He follows orders, all right, the orders of a shadowy Muslim leader, whether it's the local mullah, or someone in Fallujah, Tikrit, Iran or Syria. Islamofascists are all in bed with bin Laden and al Qaeda, whether they're driving ice cream trucks in Oregon, and sending their kids to train abroad in terrorist camps, or living the good life in London and blowing up the Underground. President Bush's upcoming State of the Union speech may well connect the dots in excruciating detail.