In response to the guest column titled “Speak up for those who need our support, like Khadr” published on July 18.

There are theoretical and practical issues at play here. I would like to clarify some details about “child soldiers” that I feel may be missing.

First, there is the idea of being able to conceptualize and understand the results of your actions. This ability begins to manifest in children by the age of 12 years, thus they know what most likely will result from their actions, in general and specific terms.

Next is the concept of willing (enthusiastic) vs. coerced (forced) participation, and then the idea of the immediacy of a threat.

Having been in West Africa during the time when Sierra Leone was being ravaged by war and meeting some coerced child soldiers there, I can tell you that Omar Khadr does not qualify as one.

The boys I met, some as young as 13, were abandoned and had been starving for days and then were offered food to fight; they were drugged and they were threatened with the removal of their right hand if they did not fight.

And yet they sat there, many missing their right hand, telling us this, their life’s history.

These boys had immediate threats, mental and physical, and the threats were where they lived, not halfway around the world, but they chose to stop or not to fight.

None of this was part of Khadr’s life. He was a privileged, enthusiastic, willing participant in his actions, and at 15 years old, he knew full well the potential results of his actions.

At no time did he make an honourable decision, then or now. At no time did he honour our way of life or values, as others have. I believe what he did was done to earn “family honour” in the eyes of other terrorists/extremists.