In the early years of the United States, the US had a low level war with the Muslim Barbary Pirates. Even then, federal judges wanted the US Navy to stop what they were doing, and bring captured pirates back to the US for trial, instead of hanging them on their own ships, as the British Navy did.
So US ship Captains adapted, and invariably discovered that when they had captured Barbary Pirates, that they had done so in British controlled waters, so had to turn them over to the British to hang.
This is the attitude we should take with terrorists, which is legitimate, according to the Geneva Conventions.
That is, we are allowed to hold field trials, then execute captured terrorists on the spot.
Since very, very few terrorists have any useful tactical or strategic information, this does not amount to any great loss, but does represent an enormous cost savings.
About the only useful consideration would be to take DNA samples from the captured terrorists to incorporate into a database, to help us narrow their origin to their extended family.
It wasn't their call then either. That responsibility was and remains explicit:
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations;That's from Article I, Section 8, i.e. it's Congress's responsibility to define those rules. I don't know whether they exercised it during the Barbary Wars, but they certainly haven't during the modern re-incarnation of those wars. Someone needs to tell the tears and peers crowd of the GOPe leadership that they are supposed to tell Obama what to do here, he doesn't get to be an absolute dictator and define all the rules of engagement.
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;