>They wouldn't fly him to the US, because he would have rights if he were here on our soil....

OK, you are taking the approach that Gitmo is not US soil. That is really the salient point since you seem to be thinking that Dragan would have Habeas rights on US soil.

(c) The Suspension Clause has full effect at Guantanamo. The
Government’s argument that the Clause affords petitioners no rights
because the United States does not claim sovereignty over the naval
station is rejected. Pp. 22–42.
(i) The Court does not question the Government’s position that
Cuba maintains sovereignty, in the legal and technical sense, over
Guantanamo, but it does not accept the Government’s premise that
de jure sovereignty is the touchstone of habeas jurisdiction. Common-
law habeas’ history provides scant support for this proposition,
and it is inconsistent with the Court’s precedents and contrary to
fundamental separation-of-powers principles. Pp. 22–25.
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/06-1195.pdf

Your disagreement is with this finding by the Court that Habeas rights extend to Gitmo.

Peter