There has been a lot of discussion about Bush’s nominee for Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, and whether he views waterboarding as torture.  Like most executive branch people, he hems and haws and never really answers the question.  See, for example, this LA Times article.

It seems to me that the question that needs to be asked of these guys is this:  Is the US doing anything to prisoners that we would not want done to our soldiers if they were captured by the enemy?  If your son or daughter were captured, would you be uncomfortable with the enemy doing the same things to them that we do to our prisoners?  Cuts to the heart of the matter, at least to me.

The whole reason for the Geneva Convention, it seems to me, was to make sure that our guys were treated well enough when they were captured during war.  So, we (and other countries) said we would treat the enemy in a certain way so that our guys would be too.   So, that is the litmus test: are we treating the enemy in a way we would want our guys treated?