A Court of Law.
If they admit and are helpful, they get an easier sentence.
If evidence is provided, that is good and they are proved guilty, they should be sentenced to whatever the crime permits.
However, to keep people locked up, for a maybe, this is against everything the US and her allies stand for.
Just think what happened with this new world court for the Trial of War criminals. The US rejected it out of sight and will not sell arms to any of the countries that would send US militiary to this court.
It just give the fundamentalists and any US bashes ammunition.
If there is no evidence, then you gotta let them go. They were certainly not involved in September if they were in Afghanistan, and being in Afghanistan fighting for the Taliban was never a crime, they were a government, which had had meeting with the US government, therfore recognized as such.
After all, we hear all the time, they hate us because of our Freedom.
Now It's Time to Walk the Talk
You are sadly misinformed. These people were captured pursuant to a combat operation and are being held as prisoners of war, not criminals. As members of Al Qaeda, they belong to an organization which is still conducting armed attacks against the USA. No different than any other prisoners of war, they may legitimately be held for the duration of hostilities or until the capturing power decides to release them, normally under some type of parole.
The tens of thousands of Afghans who were captured but were simple members of the Taliban Army were released after the Taliban were defeated and a new Afghan government in place. The guys in Guantanamo are Al Qaeda--big difference. Releasing them would be like releasing Nazi SS prisoners while we were still at war with Germany.
You are sadly misinformed. These people were captured pursuant to a combat operation and are being held as prisoners of war, not criminals. As members of Al Qaeda, they belong to an organization which is still conducting armed attacks against the USA. No different than any other prisoners of war, they may legitimately be held for the duration of hostilities or until the capturing power decides to release them, normally under some type of parole.
The tens of thousands of Afghans who were captured but were simple members of the Taliban Army were released after the Taliban were defeated and a new Afghan government in place. The guys in Guantanamo are Al Qaeda--big difference. Releasing them would be like releasing Nazi SS prisoners while we were still at war with Germany.
Staying away from the International Criminal Court (ICC) was the right thing to do. The ICC is an independent court composed of international jurists with universal jurisdiction over war crimes, etc.
Not a bad idea in concept, but the problem is that its independence also makes it unaccountable, there are no checks or balances. It does not answer to the UN or the Security Council or any other body.
It is supposed to defer to nations that conduct their own investigations, trials, etc; but the ICC can claim jurisdiction at any point if they themselves determine that an investigation came to the wrong conclusion, the trial was unfair, or the sentence inappopriate.
That is the crux of the problem with this court for the USA. Obviously there are people on the international legal scene who harbor substantial anti-Americanism or whose ideology is hostile to American principles or who may disagree with an American foreign policy decision. Many of these people will be on the ICC and doubtless some would use the authority invested in the ICC to pursue their anti-American agenda.