"Omar is captured in Afghanstan after setting off a car bomb that kills or wounds American troops plus several Afghans. He is brought to Gitmo for questioning. I believe it is your point that he should either be tried or turned loose.   If he is to be tried, with what should he be charged? What American law did he break? If he is to be turned loose, turned loose where?"

Charge him with guerilla warfare. He blew up soldiers that were invading his country. Terrorism, I believe, is violence directed at civilians for purposes of shock & awe, so perhaps the Afghans have (scanty) grounds for trying him, unless they consider it collateral damage.

Damned if I know what American law he broke, and I assume from your question you don't know either. So if he didn't break an American law we should hold him w/o charge? Odd logic. There's lots of American laws you & I haven't broken. We could be up the w.k. creek.

Turn him loose back where he came from. Why was he shipped all the way to Gitmo anyway? If we can't think of a reason to hold him ("Just in case" isn't a reason) why are we doing it?

Ng is captured in Vietnam after setting off a bomb that kills or wounds American troops plus several Vietnamese…

Pierre (of the Resistance) is captured in occupied France after setting off a bomb that kills or wounds German troops plus several Frenchmen…

Far as I can see "Gitmo" is shorthand for a number of abuses committed by a government that believes torture is acceptable, and any criticism of themselves is not.

clint