Besides the problem of the complexity of the legal rules, highlighted in my previous posts, there is the problem of whether the military is really and truly staffing these things. They may be woefully understaffed and justice practically inaccessible for that reason. The military-staffed tribunals may have trouble being sufficiently impartial with the Islamic claimants that come before their secular court. It was people of the Islamic religion who brought down the Twin Towers, you know, and caused all those horribly grisly deaths that they videotaped and which we must never forget.
But, I don't think we have even mentioned the most serious problem a prospective claimant would have: problems of proof. You go out one morning and find that your car has been thrashed, how do you prove who did it? If the miltary shoots all your goats for no good reason, do you really think witnesses (if any) are going to go to the tribunal and help you get economic compensation from the same military that just shot a bunch of goats for no good reason?
I mean, I haven't been to Kabul, so I don't know what life is like there -- my hypotheticals are just guesses at what a tort claim might be like. But any claim you try to imagine, from the most forgivable auto accident to the alleged attrocities of Haditha is not going to be susceptible to easy proof. More than anything else, difficulty of proof is what blocks most claims. If the military readily admitted liability and took blame for its torts, then this proof problem would not be insurmountable.
I don't think the military does rush forward to admit responsibility tho, even when they are responsible. Maybe I am wrong about all of this. I haven't been to Afghanistan ever. But, like I said, maybe the mayor is waving at us from the moon, longjumping 3X as far as he can on Earth and picking up rocks from the bottom of the Sea of Tranquility. Why not?