We have to be willing to destroy the enemy
We do not oppose the trials of terrorist because of fear, but because they are an irrational response to people making war against us. Lawfare is a poor match for warfare with this enemy. It is part of the failed policy of the 90s that led to 9-11.
It's not true that the only good terrorist is a dead terrorist. Even dead terrorists aren't good. But at least they're dead.
And that helps.
But political correctness has possessed Washington. It's so bad that even Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who's done a great job in many other respects, parrots the cliché that "we can't kill our way out of this."
Well, folks, there's no other way out of this all-or-nothing struggle with fanatics. Three thousand years of history teach that there's no alternative -- none -- to killing fanatics in large numbers when your enemies are ablaze with religious zeal.
I use the term destroy rather than kill because it encompasses more than just killing. It includes destroying the infrastructure of terrorism. It is how the Israelis defeated the second intifada. It is how we defeated al Qaeda in Iraq. Certainly killing the enemy is part of the deal, but you have to destroy their ability to move to contact and retreat from contact. You destroy this enemy when you limit their freedom of movement.
Once you have captured the enemy, they should be held until the end of the war or their death, which ever comes sooner. If they are tried for war crimes it should be in a military tribunal.