Candidates and Combatants By Andrew C. McCarthy
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/288506
Monday night’s debate featured an exchange between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum regarding the treatment of American citizens who join with our jihadist enemies to make war against our country. Watching it, I got the impression that Santorum was trying to suggest a wedge between himself and Romney where I don’t think there is one — and perhaps making a play for voters who have been spun up by Ron Paul’s spurious claims about the recently enacted National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). (I addressed those claims in an exchange with the congressman’s son, Sen. Rand Paul, a few weeks back — see here and here).
The answers by both Romney and Santorum to the question posed seemed a bit confused — not really wrong, but incomplete. That is to be expected when candidates are given just a few seconds to address complex issues.
Romney was asked whether he would have signed the NDAA, as President Obama recently did. The matter is controversial because Paul, like much of the Left, claims it is unconstitutional: it provides for indefinite detention of American citizens if they are found to be enemy combatants. Romney replied that he would have signed the bill, correctly implying that, as the courts have held, American citizens may be detained under the laws of war if they join the enemy during wartime.