>>>Yeah, we're pretty much on the same page on that one. If they were a legitimate green-light with a red-dot on them I would think their welfare isn't the top priority..l
>>
>>Qustion is ;
>>Were they leigitimate 'green-light with a red-dot on them' targets at first place ?
>>It is on thing to capture and then detain real terrorists as in let say those ex intelligence 'assets',
>>(hence that Omar Khalid Al-Whatever and allegedly even OBL himeself), while it is different to 'red-dot' and then detain some angry Afganistan sheppards for holding guns in vicinity of their own homes.
>>Circumstances and indept unbiased examination would of big importance here.
>>
>>{Political satire on}
>>If you are talking about true AQ hardliners with some of them being even 'ex assets' , then I might even support that 'middle of the sea idea', provided that they are dropped there along with entire hierarchy of their ex recruiters, from the middlemen and all the way to the
>>top {vbg}
>>But Naah. That is barbaric.
>>{Political satire off}
>>
>>Fair trials (preferably public) in a proper courts would be perhaps much more productive (and interesting) for everybody.
>
>And it would be really cool when we layed out as part of the evidence all sources of intelligence ( I mean those that haven't already been published in the New York Times)
>
>AQ would be feeding us people just so they could watch the trials on TV and take notes.

Are you certain that others aren't doing that already? Have you heard of Jan Baz Khan who was turning over innocents in order to get in good with the U.S. military. Then the military was torturing the prisoners for information. Lovely.

Are you also familiar with the Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRT) and the accidental declassification of information on Murat Kurnaz where the information showed nothing detrimental at all but for a single unsigned, unsourced memo that said he was a terrorist, but the CSRT classified him as an enemy combatant anyway? How many more of these might there be? How can this stuff be defended? These are real people whose lives are being destroyed by what appears in some cases to be mere overzealousness.

There ought to be a real, honest, non-partisan, objective look at the detainees to see who is a danger and who is not. Clearly the CSRT isn't doing a proper job of it.

>
>But of course we'd feel good about ourselves and the man on the street in Karachi and Kandehar would think well of us, and that's what's really important <s>