I was thinking more along the lines of the government deciding that since folks like the Taliban etc are deriving their income from drug supply, drug dealers are therefore supporters of terrorism and to be treated accordingly (not to mention that by combining the war on drugs and the war on terror, there are savings to be made that can be
embezzled fed back into the war effort.
Touche, I had not thought of it like that.
The Taliban are backwards thugs who make their money guarding drug gangsters. The money they earn keeping government and foreign forces from the poppies and processing is used to support their true calling. (Murdering anyone not interested in living in the 18th Century.) The Afghan heroin guys are not themselves terrorists. While they would be unhappy if heroin became legal, the price would drop, their interest is strictly pecuniary, and if they found a more lucrative yet legal activity their focus would change quick, fast, and in a hurry.
FARC is (almost was, and good riddance) a Marxist revolutionary group that makes its money in refining and shipping drugs, mostly cocaine. They also have a side business in kidnapping and have engaged in terrorist acts that the Afghan drug tribes have not.
To get sent to Gitmo you have to be captured on a foreign battlefield. If you are a citizen Gitmo is not the right place for you. Doubly so for something like dealing drugs, one could make an argument for the folks who meet the Colombian cocaine submarines
might be deserving of trial for materiel support of a terrorist group, but still not a Gitmo type person.
The "war on drugs" was stupid from the get go and really just needs curl up in the corner and die.