A debate ensues about whether the man should be tried in criminal courts, where he would be afforded the same rights as all accused criminals (e.g. a right to silence, a right to a lawyer, the presumption of innocence) or whether he should be treated as an enemy combatant, in which case he would be dealt with as a prisoner of war and afforded the rights given under the Geneva Convention.
In the hypothetical above, should the person be treated as a criminal or as an enemy combatant?
As a criminal
As an enemy combatant
I'm not sure
Something else (what?)