Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KauaiK

(544 posts)
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:07 PM Apr 2013

What is the criteria for someone to be determined as an "Enemy Combatant"?

Was the term "enemy combatant" created by Bush administration? What is the criteria to determine when someone is an "enemy combatant"? Does the weapon have to be a bomb vs a assault gun? Under what law, case law, or administrative rule does the determination of enemy combatant fall?

It appears to me to be to be arbitrary, depending on which way the political winds are blowing.

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What is the criteria for someone to be determined as an "Enemy Combatant"? (Original Post) KauaiK Apr 2013 OP
Brown person. nt onehandle Apr 2013 #1
Yup! nt Walk away Apr 2013 #3
They're feisty, and they don't like you. nt Xipe Totec Apr 2013 #2
I could tell you.. Fumesucker Apr 2013 #4
First it needs to be on a battlefield, second and most important, not a citizen still_one Apr 2013 #5
But wasn't John Walker Lindh a citizen? I think he was classified as an enemy combatant. Gregorian Apr 2013 #7
You may be right but I thought it was treason still_one Apr 2013 #15
More or less dipsydoodle Apr 2013 #6
anyone who can be used to make democrats look weak on terror spanone Apr 2013 #8
Anyone taking up arms against the government, citizen or not, I would think. randome Apr 2013 #9
So that would include Ted Nugent, right? KauaiK Apr 2013 #10
He hasn't taken up arms. He shit his pants when the Secret Service questioned him. randome Apr 2013 #14
Start here. DevonRex Apr 2013 #11
Thanks! KauaiK Apr 2013 #13
The term precedes the war on terror nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #12

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
6. More or less
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:18 PM
Apr 2013

whatever the US needs it to be. The US changed the historic definition following 9/11.

I thought Pres. Obama had dropped its usage.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
9. Anyone taking up arms against the government, citizen or not, I would think.
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:23 PM
Apr 2013

Although the exact definition may depend on whether it occurs on American or foreign soil. My guess is foreign.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
14. He hasn't taken up arms. He shit his pants when the Secret Service questioned him.
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 07:38 PM
Apr 2013

Hot air is not a very useful weapon.

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
11. Start here.
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:38 PM
Apr 2013
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/32/11.5

Work your way backwards, until you see that this is indeed the section you need. Then back, and you'll have to read all the definitions to put a good understanding together.

This site also has the Supreme Court decisions like Hamdi.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/03-6696

KauaiK

(544 posts)
13. Thanks!
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 07:36 PM
Apr 2013

I haven't read all of it yet...but I will. It still seem arbitrary and political as to who gets charged as an enemy combatant and who doesn't. I appreciate your effort to inform!!

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
12. The term precedes the war on terror
Mon Apr 22, 2013, 06:38 PM
Apr 2013

Taking up arms against the US and capture in an actual battlefield.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What is the criteria for ...