As we have stated many times, on a Constitutional level, the only way the President can lead the troops is if Congress declares War. The Bush Admin did not want to have a War declared, because people like Yoo and Gonzales thought that doing so would inhibit their ability to interrogate via torture. (They were wrong in their assumption that if Congress didn't declare War they would be able to torture. Common Article Three of the Geneva Accords stipulates that any non-uniformed combatant captured in action on the soil of a signatory nation must be afforded all the protections of the Accords, even if there is no War declared.) Sooo... Since there was no declaration of War, that means that anyone captured on the battlefield cannot be held as a POW and must be held under US criminal code, which would mean that the suspect must also be afforded a Habeas Corpus hearing to have the evidence against him presented. The Bushies have not wanted to do that, and now, occasionally, the Obama folks are starting to do it correctly.

Here is the piece. And for "republicans" who are upset that a potential terrorist might be set free? Well talk to Bush and ask why they didn't ask for a Declaration of War. Want to blame someone, look in the mirror, man.

Now, about the US military being out around the world in the first place, we'll have to talk more about that some time won't we?

http://original.antiwar.com/worthington/2009/07/31/judge-orders-release-of-tortured-juvenile-guantanamo-prisoner/

Be Seeing You!