Not sure I can agree with Michael Yon on this

It's rare I find much to disagree with from Yon, but this article troubles me some.

His closing paragraph:

We can win without torture. President Bush saw the strategic advantages of the Surge when many thought the Iraq War was lost. Yet he refuses to categorically condemn and outlaw torture. His unwillingness to do so has put the United States and its allies at strategic disadvantage, one that will take us a long time to overcome. And it has cost American lives.

What seems to be missing here is what has been largely missing from most public discourse on the subject of torture - a common definition.

If this were from someone other than Yon I'd expect he was talking, in his piece, about any discomfort, that seems to be one extreme often noted.

Some would have us treat suspected terrorists better than we treat a rape suspect here, or so it seems. NOTE: I'm emphatically NOT saying Yon suggests that, but by not defining the term more clearly he is leaving open the question.

There is no question the we need to aim for the high moral ground, we really are better than our enemies, but let's not 'toss the baby out with the bathwater'.