statement for effect. Certainly had one I can see.

My point is more basic. Here we are in a "moral dilemma" about how to treat enemies that don't share those morals.

Yes, it has to be done. I understand that. And its certain that we aren't always going to catch "a live one" and making sure we treat them well should be a priority...but I still can see the side of the argument that asks for clarity in the rules.

Here you link to an article that talks about "coercive interrogation" being "maybe" illegal.

Well, damn it...is it or isn't it? The inquiring mind of GWB wants to know.

It would be better if we could keep secrets, wouldn't it?