Most "thinking" it violated international law does not mean that it actually did. I would say the PR war was lost, but on the legal issue, the Bush administration was in the right.
We violated no legal binding international agreement that we signed.
Yes, but legally that is not relevant and has no bearing.
Well to be clear waterboarding three known masterminds of terror attacks was not bad. Other instances were people have been tried were wrong.
So Truman and FDR are war criminals?
That depends on who you ask. In many scenarios of deterrence, nuclear weapons need to be viewed as first strike option.
Which is exactly what we did with almost all of them.
So you agree that circumstances dictate our behavior?
Numbers driven yes, but what is also important is knowing that their nuclear weapons work. In the United States for example, Bush tried to implement the RRW program just to ensure our weapons could work and it was branded as destabilizing and the move of "war-monger." I fail to see how wanting to make sure our weapons work is destabilizing and provoking war.
She didn't want to continue in the field as a civilian?
I do not think that waterboarding three people equates to the end of American empire exactly.
