Memo dump, Part II

Question: What changes to Pentagon unlawful-combatant interrogation policy are the American people insisting upon? Better yet: What changes do Nancy Pelosi and Tom Daschle insist are necessary? Anything?

Here's one big thing that is bugging me about this document dump, which was spurred by a torrent of criticism and unbridled allegations: Now anybody and everybody knows flat out without a doubt what the Americans will and will not do to you if you're a captured terrorist. Specifically, now the terrorists themselves are doubly assured that if they are captured, the Americans will do nothing to harm them. Is it more likely or less likely now that we will get lifesaving intelligence information out of these criminals? Will the world of the near future be more safe or less safe owing to the carping and kvetching of political critics who really ought to know better?

So have the Administration's detractors improved the moral stance of the United States by their efforts? Seeing as how the documents demonstrate that Administration policy is already more kid-glove than most Americans had probably thought, I don't anticipate policy moving even further toward being nice to the terrorists. The upshot is that we've created a pseudo-scandal that results in no appreciable policy change but potentially impedes our ability to discover and prevent murderous terrorist operations. Pardon me if I don't appluad.