Debate with you is almost impossible. Your statements are collections of random intellectual discharges, often irrelevant to the case. I have to spend many posts simply rehashing old territory because it's obvious you never actually process anything I say, or any information I link to.

You don't have a grasp of the abstract principles at stake, as indicated by you conflating a soldier or volunteer dying for an ideal, as opposed to an unsuspecting office worker sitting in a skyscraper.

You don't think about larger concepts either. Does what America "stand for" apply to other wars, other cases of endangered Americans?

In WWII, we obliterated entire cities in Europe and Japan when Americans were threatened. Is this worse than waterboarding someone who threatens Americans? Entirely different? Why?

If you say it was because we were at war back then, and not now, I'll know you're not thinking about the issue.

Obama approved shooting the brains out of three men because he thought one American was endangered. Such decisions, in fact, are made by SWAT teams in American every week. Nobody thinks twice about this. In fact, they are correct decisions.

But when intelligence agencies waterboarded a man who had information about attacks on Americans on our soil, suddenly the U.S. becomes evil incarnate. Does this actually make sense?

Where is that line being drawn? Why? Have you ever actually THOUGHT about this, or are you just going by emotion and instinct?