First of all, the Omar Khadr case is a complicated case and case which there are far more questions then answers.
To be frank with you, considering the lack of information that we have on him and his family, it’s quite dishonest to use his case as a tool to make more political capital.
Personally, I am strongly against the use of Guantanamo Bay as a prison and I am very firm on my position against torture (because I would personaly never want to be tortured myself and I don’t know many people who would like being tortured), but I understand that the situation in a war zone is far from being »nice and gentle ».
In recent wars, yes, there have been people which had been executed on the spot which were not adults. It’s something horrific, but it’s a part of the horrible reality of war.
But, two questions about the Khadr case were never answered:
1)Where were his parents? Afghanistan after 9/11 is not a place to put a teenager who has Canadian citizenship.
So, even if Khadr was framed by doing this considering his life experience, very few have EVER given any clue on the role of his parents. Which kind of sick, weirdo family are you when you are using your children as a ploy?
2)The complicated thing is that when Khadr has killed the US military serviceman, he was on which law? You basically have the law of two regimes in Afghanistan, the US »regular » law, the US »martial » law, the international law regarding POW. So, even experts in this domain don’t know for sure.
Again, in another case, let’s say that a teenager with a Canadian citizenship kill a member of the armed forces in Saudi Arabia or Iran, what would be the consequences?
God Forbids, I honestly don’t think that this will have a pretty outcome.
The big problem comes also with the political argument on top of that.
No government (whatever the party colour) wants to have this hot potato in their hands.
I am sure that many politicians are saying, if we release him, he will probably: 1)Do something as a revenge which leads to political consequences 2)Ask for a big compensation, and this is never going well with the public opinion
Another thing is the »child solider » argument. Whatever this argument could be valid or not, why are people not so keen on seeing who’s beyond Khadr? Usually, in other cases of childrens which are soldiers, there is always an organization behind it.
In conclusion, I am against military interventionnism because it always leads to unintended consequences, but I do actually belive the the Khadr case is nothing else then a political »wedge » issue. An issue not really related to Khadr the individual himself who is the cheese in the sandwich, but a very partisan issue done to make political capital on many fronts.
And in some cases, the political capital seems quite borderline on useful idocy. It’s not because you are against foreign military interventions and against torture (and I am strongly against this), that you must be a border line apologist for some iliberal dumbwits (in this case Khadr’s family) who actually knew better. Khadr should have been a normal kid, since he had the oppornunity of having Canadian citizenship, not some kind of pseudo-martyr from some groups which have nothing else to do to use childrens to do their dirty work.