Individual Liberty Vs Public Safety

Individual Liberty Vs Public Safety

By Joseph Parish

By simple definition the term "Enemy Combatant" refers essentially to members of an opposing state's armed forces which one may be waging war with. As described by the Geneva Convention, it designates those individuals who could be detained under the associated war laws, while the most significant definition reverts to those who are parties to the conflict going on.

Under the Bush administration the term had been updated to signify those alleged members of the terrorist group known as al Qaeda, that have been detained as enemies of war. These people do not qualify to be designated as prisoners of war as specified by the Geneva Convention rules.

Our Supreme Court in 1942, provided a ground breaking determination between those unlawful combatants and the lawful individuals. The unlawful combatants were subject to being captured and detainment, placed on trial, and the ultimate punishment extended by our military tribunals for their unlawful activities. The major distinction was that the unlawful combatants were generally posed as civilians, who usually were conducting clandestine activities detrimental to our nation's welfare. These "spies" were normally not afforded the provision of a captured military member but commonly received harsher treatment.

After our dreaded September 11th attacks, Congress quickly passed their war power resolution, which authorized the use of military force to fight terrorists. President Bush was quick to seize upon this expansion of power to issue his detention and treatment proclamation to combat terrorism. In these declarations, the term enemy combatants were chosen for those individuals who were detained under Bushes military orders. It is now commonly used to designate alleged detainment of members of the al-Qaida terrorist organization. It is universally employed as an attempt to prevent terrorists from being tried within the US civilian court system.

In 2009, President Obama agreed with the Bush interpretation of the law when it was argued to bar any access to the civil court system by enemy combatants, however a month later, he announced that he was planning to phase out the specific term of enemy combatant.

I support the Bush administration policy as a necessary act relating to the war on terrorism. Today our wars are no longer fought merely with soldiers as they were in previous decades, but rather, they are accomplished by the use of highly skilled and trained civilians. We must consider the enemy in all aspects of development. We are fighting a specific group of people who value "death" as a means of religious salvation. To die violently for their cause is an honor to these combatants.

In order to confront suicide bombers, we must adapt our initial understanding of their temperament. These irrational terrorists focus upon the premeditated violence which customarily is motivated by their deep-rooted political concerns. Frequently, the target group of people, which offenders seek out is noncombatant or civilian populations. We are looking at a mentality which deems their ultimate death as a major precondition towards a successful mission.

We have to understand the fact that these suicide bombers are thrilled to lose their lives through their irrational behavior and premeditated violence in support of their political motivates. Like themselves, their targets are usually the noncombatant or civilian population. Their death is an indication of a successfully completed mission. The fact of the matter is that these villains are simply not selective as to who they intend as targets. It could occur in schools where innocent children may be in attendance or one of them may casually stroll into a local hospital strapped with several pounds of C4. Another reason for my support of Bush's policy is that I do not believe our civilian courts are appropriate for the effective prosecution of enemy combatants. Excluding the military tribunals that are associated with the status of enemy combatant we have nothing at our disposal in which to charge and try these detainees.

There are those who may contest the policy under the guise of fair play and legitimacy, but unfortunately the truth of the matter is that by denying the detainee the right to speak with a lawyer we are providing our military with a strong weapon to combat terrorism. First off, under both the international laws relating to war as well as our constitution those individuals who are classified as enemy combatants can be legally detained and dealt with appropriately. Both the lawful and unlawful combatants are legal detainees for the entire duration of any hostilities in order to ensure that they do not resume fighting against us. Secondly, these are not American citizens and above all are not being held on American soil and as such the full extent of our constitution and bill of rights should not necessarily apply. Do not misunderstand me as I am not condoning torture in the least, but the act of detaining and interrogating could save many American lives.

The conflict against al-Qaeda and its affiliated entities is not new by any stretch of the imagination, however it does present a challenge in substance and style which has not been seen previously. We currently reside in serious times where a short-sighted policy change may seem frivolous and unthinking in view of the greater demand being placed upon the military. The use of the military justice system to detain the captured combatants with intent to imprison for the duration of any established hostilities are not against our democratic principles or moral values. There is nothing unlawful about a democracy denying unconventional fighters those rights equivalent to nation's lawful soldiers.

In conclusion, I never did and never will believe that we can actually win a war on terrorism. We are waging campaigns on a global scale, but few are restricted to a battlefield in any specific geographical area. The best we can do with any type of ideology is deal with it as appropriately as we possibly can. Only through our persistent commitment to protect and defend our own way of life can we possibly win any of the battles.

Visit me at www.wordwriter.info