>>>I thought we were in agreement that it isn't right to hold people for years without charges or trial. Try 'em or kick 'em loose. The only difference between this and what Stalin or Saddam Hussein would have done is they would have simply executed the prisoners by now. Is that really the company we want to keep?
>>>
>>>Notice I am not addressing whether they are guilty or innocent. I imagine most of them were taken into custody for good reason. So try them already.
>>
>>Under what legal system? Presumption of innocence, Miranda warning, chain-of-evidence, full disclosure to the defense?
>>
>>If it were that easy, it would have been done by now, if only for convenience and to make room for more.
>>
>
>When will people get it that these are enemy combatants, not suspects? A third of these detainees are classified as too dangerous to release, even though there is not enough evidence to prosecute. Personally, if they are that dangerous, I would drop them off in the middle of the ocean and let them swim to any country they want. . . .

Yes, and they are not part of any country's army and there are no regulations for dealing with this type of situation except the criminal code of the country they attack. New laws for dealing with mentally deranged terrorists are necessary. Although, the above suggestion by John looks pretty good.