Thanks Wibble for your take on the issue. Very interesting.

Ted, I appreciate your notion that is just a matter of degree between our views, but I don’t think it is so.

There are some serious differences:

As I keep on saying, nothing that you have expressed seems to justify the notion of interminable incarceration without charge or trial. There is just simply no reason why captives can’t be tried soon after they are caught, especially when they are kept in a stable non-war setting, a continent or two away from the battlefront. They are afterall intensively interrogated, so why not extend this process into legal determination? You don’t seem to think this is necessary at all.

That’s a pretty big difference in our views.

Another really big difference is your willingness to condemn people before they are tried, based on evidence that you simply cannot take at face value…. and in doing so, pay no credence to the fundamental tenet of innocent until proven guilty.

You keep saying that: “The real disagreement stems from the question whether we are, or are not at war.”, and I keep saying that it shouldn’t matter whether it is war or not.

And the other big difference is that you seem to place no significance at all in the contradiction between the US’ democratic doctrine and its antidemocratic actions in Guantanamo.

But I agree, our bottom-line - protecting society and locking away the (real) criminals - is the same.

Ludwig:

And I say that I have repeatedly offered a cogent justification - the exigencies of war. But, of course, because you reject the proposition that we are in a state of armed conflict, you seek to apply the standards and expectations of our peacetime criminal justice system to a realm where they don't belong.

But then, we have been here before.

I think by this point we have aired the crux of our arguments (several times over). I don't see a lot of point in continuing to chase our tails. We'll just have to live with the fact that east will be east and west will be west on this question, and the twain shall not meet.

I appreciate the civility with which you have conducted our colloquy, and I look forward to crossing rhetorical swords with you on other issues.

Cheers,

Ted

Yes I think our debate has reached its natural conclusion

It has been fascinating

Thanks Ted