Attorney General Gonzales asserted in Senate testimony that while habeas corpus is "one of our most cherished legal protections. (I'm using the term "legal protections" to avoid confusion between natural rights that exist with or without legal underpinning, and specific legal rights/protections/traditions.) And he was right. There are also other cherished legal protections, but people captured in conflicts don't have the same protections. It can be debated whether a captured enemy illegal combatant should have the full protection of the Geneva conventions, but even if you assume that Al Qaeda operatives get the same protection as soldiers from signatory nations that have themselves respected the conventions, and should be treated as full POWs, they still don't have the same protections under our laws, that ordinary citizens do.
To date, there have been a number of confirmed cases in which non-American civilians have been incorrectly classified as enemy combatants.
Assuming this is true, it only means that mistakes were made. Mistakes are going to happen, and their existence doesn't change the philosophical, constitutional, legal, and traditional principles we are talking about.
In war innocent people also get killed. That's even worst then being detained for a time. If you require no harm to any innocent by your efforts in a conflict, you require surrender. |
