[VaBthang4]

"But some international-law scholars suggest that President Bush's plan for military tribunals itself violates international law."

I understand that the author is a professor of ahem..."international" law but why is this perspective even considered.

I dont care if it blatently and willfully violates every major pillar of international law and spits in the face of it's founder....whoever that is.

We do what we do...if the international community doesnt like it then all the better.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

it would be a mistake to demand for Al Qaeda and the Taliban leadership the full protections accorded armies that respect the law of war. The military tribunals established by the presidential order . . . should not be measured by a false standard.

The recent event involving the near ignition of a shoe bomb on an airplane is a strong reminder that . . . Al Qaeda has chosen tactics that specifically target civilians. The extraordinary protections that we provide in domestic trials, including trials under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for disciplinary offenses, should not be granted to [ruthless irregular] combatants<> who have trampled on the laws of war.

[rm3friskerFTN]

Any weblinks to the "the third Geneva Convention of 1949"???

[jwalsh07]

Sweet, I'll bet Safire has his boxers in a twist after reading this one.

[LarryLied]

This wrangling illustrates one reason why a declaration of war is not a good idea. A congressional declaration of war would only give ammo to those trying to get our enemies off easy.