This is a "what if" post, not a defense of George W. Bush's record.
But clobber me if you're the kind that thinks I shouldn't be allowed to ponder out loud. Call me a troll, though a quick review of my posts will demonstrate my unwavering opposition to W's policies and my unwavering support for Barack Obama since before the day I joined this board.
Here's the thought experiment:
A. The following ARE true:
- "Excluding the 19 hijackers, 2,974 people died in the attacks. Another 24 are missing and presumed dead." -- wikipedia entry on 9/11
- Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed admitted he planned the attacks in a 2002 Al Jazeera interview prior to his capture, imprisonment and waterboarding at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
B. IF all of the following are true:
- Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed was suspected to have intimate details of other Al Qaeda operations that, if not stopped, could result in the deaths of several thousand Americans.
- Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed refused to divulge details of these operations under normal interrogation methods.
- Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding, whereupon these operations were thwarted by law enforcement.
C. THEN (Remembering all the above are considered facts in this experiment):
Which choice should a U.S. president make?- Consent to the waterboarding of Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed
- Risk the death of American lives on a scale approaching or surpassing the nearly 3,000 killed on 9/11
No arguing with the presumed facts. No changing the scenario. Just answer the question before you present an opinion.