The U.S. has faced criticism from abroad over detaining inmates at Guantanamo (foreign nationals usually) for lengthy periods of time without a trial or fair hearing. I already fully understand the original reasoning for these practices. The U.S. has been fighting a war on terrorism, so the prisoners could fall under the definition of "prisoners of war." Also, the prisoners don't really have the protection of the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution, because they are typically not U.S. citizens. I disagree with the practice, though, and I will explain why. The ethical distinction that should be employed comes from the fact that, by all appearances, the U.S. now seems to be using Guantanamo as a "detention center." The prisoners have human rights, therefore they do have the right to a speedy and public hearing/trial before an "impartial tribunal," as stated, for example, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even in a time of war, it i