. . .let me just say this. Treating people like Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev as anything other than common criminals just gives them the validation they seek. I'm quite certain terrorists want to think of themselves as soldiers fighting for some sort of noble cause, and if we try them as "enemy combattants" or send them to military tribunals, or in any way treat them like they are different than any other murdering scumbag, we look like we agree with them. Just try Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev in a regular Massachussets court, and if he is found guilty, which seems nearly certain, throw him in a Massachussets prison and throw away the key, just as you would any street thug who murdered three people on the streets of Boston. And we should long ago have brought Gitmo detainees to New York to face trial, if they actually had anything to do with 9/11, which most of them probably did not, because how many people does it really take to plan this sort of attack?
And on the subject of Gitmo detainees, as I understand it, many of them are there because they are suspected "insurgents." Being an "insurgent" is not a crime. When a foreign army invades your country, you're supposed to fight against them. To not do so would be cowardly. Doing harm to American soldiers is absolutely what Iraqi and Afghani citizens should be doing, as long as those soldiers are in Iraq and/or Afghanistan. Don't get me wrong, I don't want any harm to befall any American soldiers. Nor do I want harm to befall any Iraqi or Afghani. That's why I was against these wars from the start. I don't want to see any person of any nationality killed or maimed. But when you invade a foreign country, it is the height of arrogance to suggest that the citizens of that country have no right to fight back.
Also, there's a pretty good chance that a lot of the detainees have done nothing against us. If they had, it shouldn't be that hard to just hold the damn trials already.