Look, the simple reason the prisoners at Guantanamo are considered "unlawful armed combatants" instead of "prisoners of war" is because the "enemy" in the "war on terror" is an idea, not a country. The terms of The Geneva Convention are based upon the conventional idea of war being a conflict between two or more geopolitical entities. If we accept the country-versus-country definition of "war", then the "war on terror" isn't technically a war at all. It is an armed attempt to neutralize adherents of a certain philosophy. Whether or not those adherents are uniformed members of the armed services of some country is totally irrelevent.

If the US is going to change the definition of "war" to mean armed action against an idea instead of a nation, then the definition of "prisoner of war" must be changed to afford those fighting on behalf of that idea the same rights as would be extended to those fighting on behalf of a nation in a more conventionally defined war.

Perhaps it's time for the Geneva Convention to be reconvened.