Liberal Tears

The Obama administration continues to set its own course, often to the consternation of its liberal supporters. Right now, liberals are donning ashes and sack cloth as the Obama administration decided to continue a policy established by the Bush administration, specifically, the denial of United States constitutional rights to combatants being held in Afghanistan. See this.

An administration spokesperson explains the difference between this position and the status of Guantanamo prisoners thusly:

The Justice Department argues that Bagram is different from Guantanamo Bay because it is in an overseas war zone and the prisoners there are being held as part of an ongoing military action. The government argues that releasing enemy combatants into the Afghan war zone, or even diverting U.S. personnel there to consider their legal cases, could threaten security.

I'm shocked, shocked, that the American Civil Liberties Union is having a hissy fit:

"They've now embraced the Bush policy that you can create prisons outside the law," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who has represented several detainees.

I would like to hear how the ACLU would handle those folks in Afghanistan who are hiding among the indigenous population and firing weapons at American troops. They are not constituted as uniformed army representing an established state so they can't be considered soldiers in a traditional sense and thereby be accorded the rights of the Geneva Convention. Would ACLU prefer that these guys be handled like common street criminals and accorded all of the constitutional protections? Should they be read their Miranda rights? Would they like US forces to collect physical and testimonial evidence to be presented in a court of law?

Please, ACLU, tell me how you would like to handle these people.