Why is everybody so up in arms about this stuff? Like you said, I think I was subjected to and subjected others to much worse growing up. Back then we didn't call it torture, we called it teasing. And I garauntee you that if someone gave one of these guys a wedgie it would be front page news.

Thanks for putting that in perspective.

Are you sure we're not talking here about the last party at the Kennedy compound?? No one beyond the looney-left is at all concerned about this "abuse." It certainly does not rise to the level where it should concern a sitting U.S. Senator. That it apparently does only demonstrates the underlying motivation of the Democratic Party, which is NOT to support the United States or the security of its people, but to find common cause with the terrorists in the vain hope of some anticipated future reward. But do let's keep the party rollin' -- the more this dead horse gets beat, the more ridiculous and pathetic the Democratic leadership appears. Serious people already know this and the more the Dems persist in their "outrage," the less they are taken seriously. If that's possible. Last we heard, the real enemy was Karl Rove. Go figure.

If the subjects were prisoners of war, this conduct would be entirely inappropriate and a violation of our treaty obligations and international norms.

Note the subjuctive mood, used for conditions false to fact.

These are illegal combatants, not covered by any international convention. They are members of a group or groups that specifically, and as a matter of policy, choose to place themselves entirely outside of any reasonable person's understanding of international norms.

Not only is it legal and moral to treat these people with less than the care we would treat legal combatants, it is prudent to do so. It is well that there should be a cost to barbarous conduct, to limit the utility of that conduct.

Except for maybe the menacing dog. I never had that in gym class, although my dad was the teacher, so that maybe was close. Maybe.