[HighLordDave]

Osama bin Laden is incapable of committing an act of war, although Dubya and the media would like you to believe otherwise. By definition, acts of war can only occur between states. Neither Osama bin laden, Al-Qaeda, nor the Taliban are states. The first is an individual, the second is an organisation, and the third is a militia. As such, they must be tried in a civilian court for any alleged offenses.

If we try bin Laden or any of his cronies in military courts, would you then try all terrorists in admiralty courts? Does Ted Kaczynski get a new military trial? How about this yochol sending out hoax anthrax letters to Planned Parenthood offices and abortion clinics? What about environmentalists who chain themselves to trees? Will you use a military tribunal to try students who stage a sit-in at their college president's house? Those are all acts of sedition and terrorism. At what point do you draw the line?

For the United States to expect other nations around the world to behave as we want them to, we must take the lead and give bin Laden et al all of the rights and due process under the law to which he is entitled. No, it may not be pleasant or expeditious, but it is the right thing to do.

In all probability, our friend Trym is probably right in that this entire debate will probably be rendered academic because I don't think bin Laden will be taken alive; we'll either kill him or he will commit suicide, I don't think he'll ever surrender (Martyrs must die, not rot in prison).