What a pointless argument. The U.S. doesn't give a damn about the rule of law or the rules of war. They either want to lock Hicks up forever without trial, or try and sentence him under the most revoltingly unfair procedures. You either understand that is the issue or you don't. Some people, who love scaring themselves with muslim boogeymen and love Howard's authoritarian twaddle, clearly don't.

Coach, you wrote:

'Why do you think the US is in Iraq right now?'

It certainly has nothing to do with terrorism, after all terrorism has thrived in the ME since the coalition of the drilling invaded.

One excuse was weapons of mass destruction - we all know that was a lie. Another that Saddam sponsored terror against the USA - another lie - but you know this.

Another was that Saddam was a very bad man who needed to be removed - well he was a very bad man, but that didn't stop the West from doing business with him and his ilk for years.

The real reasons why the coalition of the drilling are in Iraq?

There are two, one of which is oil (obviously), the second is dynastic:

President Bush the First, the one who went to war in the early 1990s, was the last US president who had seen service in WW2. He knew more about war than President Bush the Second could ever know. Bush the First stopped Desert Storm when its aims had been achieved. He didn't want to see the USA get embroiled in something that it had no need to get caught in.

King, I mean President, Bush the Second, however, only saw that his dad was not in power, but his dad's old enemy was still sitting on HIS throne in Baghdad, and decided to do something about it.

Heaven knows what will happen when Jeb Bush makes it onto the throne in a decade or so.

The real reason why there has been no further major terrorists attacks against the USA is that without acknowledging it the USA has met one of Al Qaeda's major demands, and removed its forces from Saudi Arabia.

Coach maybe you should put your Islamophobia into perspective and read a little history.

Hi to All... *To: Hamlet

I've read your post contained herein and found it quite thought provoking. I notice you draw a reference to an individual that apparently served with the Germans in WW2, winning the Iron Cross, and later served with Australian forces, in Vietnam winning a further gong?

Actually Hamlet, the individual to whom you refer did serve with the German Air Force, in the capacity as a WAG and a rear gunner. At the conclusion of the War,after a short period as a prisoner of war, he gained employment with the British NAFFI, serving in both Germany and Austria.

In the fifties he migrated to Australia and joined the RAAF. Later to be commissioned into the Equipment Branch. He saw further active service with the RAAF, 9 (Helicopter) Sqn., in South Vietnam. In the seventies he was awarded the MBE for his services, as a Senior Barracks Officer, at RAAF Richmond, NSW. An interesting case I'm sure you'll agree.

I sincerely hope this may shed a little further light, on the gentleman, to whom you refer.

Cheers...sungwu.

You articulate the technical discussion well. Thank You Hamlet.

Political history , viewed in context along-side psycho--history... as in the 'Emotional Life of Nations' (Lloyd De Mause), is one way to comprehend what we see the relationship between historical progress of human development, or a nations (leadership) role through the events of Peace or War.... and POVERTY!

This is to consider how the influence of social change, effects the 'emotional life of a people' ... under certain conditions, and to see the way it applys on a larger scale to nations as their inter-relationships are acted-out on this planet... the podium, until today.

A focus on our inter-relations, as a study of every day life, reveals many of the things we take for granted.

Because we take so much for granted, some things become difficult to explain as important - as they are left out, unsaid or consealed, from the knowledge of how we understand ourselves, as true players, against the backdrop of inter-exchange on this eventful podium.

This war on terror is not a war based on an idea of collective securities, it is a war made up of terror, by a willfulness that defies human understanding and it's own attributes toward future progressiveness of humanity in a meaningful sense.

Schoolyard (bullying vs bystanders) reflects the workplace of tomorrow as children become adults. Families reflect nations as a set of collective inter-relationships, influencing the outcome of national and global social exchange.

Left unsaid, is the individual reasoning. The sensiblities that influence the driving motives of our inter-action with one another; be it with our perception of David Hicks or as citizens working for self-government somehow, collectively.

There are rules to war that men of warfare abide by. If your caught in uniform your a prisoner of war and treated as such until the end of hostilities. If your caught in the other sides uniform your a spy and your personal value will depend on whether or not your of any assistance in prosecuting the war for that side. If your caught with out uniform, your a saboteur and generally shot on the spot.
Terrorist are saboteurs. They are about global sabotage. It is a war.
The trouble with this new war of global terrorism is that we are just learning and defining the rules on the hop. There is no real past experience to relate back to for guidance. The anti-Americans on these post always have the same simplistic rhetoric of American abuse of power but, they don't have an honest look at the totality of the situation. There are judges and lawyers of every allied/NATO countries working to define a methodology for dealing universally with terrorist and terrorism. Until such time as there are effective and safeguarding procedures in place for general society and new laws made; Gitmo will be the reality. That David Hicks or any other suspected terrorist is going to be let loose to continue the murder of civilians or destroy social infrastructure is unlikely.
That a terrorist will ever be treated with the same respect as a soldier in uniform is also unlikely.
For myself. When ever someone mentions terrorist I always check my shoes to see if I've stepped in dog turd.

"An honest look at the totality of the situation". And what exactly does that have to do with secret prisons, torture and kangaroo courts? It's not anti-Americanism to point this out, it's pro-justice.