US Supreme Court Ruling on Enemy Combatants, Round 2

We should hold Kabul Trials, but only after the war has been won, as was the case in WWII. Certainly you will agree that it would have been outrageous to attempt prosecutions of Nazis in the context of war, while Hitler's armies were still in occupation of Europe.

Suppose the Americans had sent in paratroopers to capture an SS general and return him to the US for interrogation. We didn't have exact information about his crimes; whatever hodgepodge intelligence was gathered would have been invalid for presentation in US courts. Does that mean we would have had a duty to release him back to his command, so that he could continue to wage war against us?

This is what you are proposing, and what the court has accepted, albeit in a split decision that may be reversed in the near future, depending on the outcome of the presidential election.

The US is engaged in a war with people that, were they to be released, would resume plotting and waging war against us. These are not a handful of Nazi generals whose armies have been vanquished and who have accepted defeat; the enemy we face needs only a handful of recruits and box cutters to murder thousands.

You have noble thoughts of justice and law, but you must realize that others are more than happy to exploit of your ivory tower ideological boundaries, with disastrous consequences. As Lincoln understood, our laws exist to serve human beings, not the reverse.