Rather than the U.S.'s broken Congress, in which everything is debated in 30-second sound bites on TV shows and for which nothing is worth getting exposed over on the House or Senate floor, AS notes that Britain is getting along with it all much better:
There is instead an open debate [in England] about the length of time terror suspects can be detained without charges. Right now, it's 28 days. The Brown government wants more time - 58 days. When you remember that Jose Padilla was detained for years without charges -
THE FAILED LEGAL STRATEGY: THINGS THAT THE GOP WILL DUMP ON THE NEXT EXECUTIVE
How many people are detained awaiting trial? That's what I want to know. When I'm being cynical, the "reason" that these trials haven't been concluded is that the Bush Administration might fear having to let someone go. Exoneration might mean that they may have made a mistake, upsetting their public line for many years that everyone at Gitmo was a terrorist (by definition).
This a problem with military tribunals. Even if you talk yourself into the possibility of them, you start to worry that detention periods have more to do with Presidential politics than the facts of the case... And that is ... how far from torture, on a conceptual taboo scale?
Also on the list of things to dump:
-Taxes that are too low and little chance that the last budget will be balanced
-An economy that is going to reel from high oil (and natural gas) prices
-An Iraq stabilization effort, in which our best estimate is that it will take years for the army to develop to a size and proficiency after which they can 'stand up'.
-An Afghan effort that is hot, hot, hot, with experts suggesting that ending the poppy-trade will not be as swift as it was in Burma's golden triangle and the Taliban showing no signs of wanting to evolve into a 'political party' alongside others.
