By Any Means Necessary

On March 8th 2008, US president George Bush used his executive power of veto to prevent the enactment of a bill that would have banned the CIA from using ‘enhanced’ methods of interrogation, such as waterboarding, on terrorism suspects. The veto overturned a vote of 222-199 in the house and 51-45 in the senate. Although House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asserted that the Democratic-led congress would attempt to overturn the executive’s veto, given the margins in each chamber, reaching the two-thirds majority needed to reverse the veto may be difficult. Mr. Bush’s latest use of veto marks yet another step in the executive branch’s strengthening of control over matters relating to war and national security, with corresponding limitations to the involvement of congress and the courts in such decisions.
The debate over the United States’ use of torture as an interrogation method arose once again in the wake of the post 9/11 ‘War on Terror’ led by the Bush administration. Historically speaking, the US policy has been an official condemnation of torture – reflecting the moral principles… On an international scale, the US is signed on to both the Geneva Convention and the UN Ban on Torture However, there are many ways to get around these ‘non-binding’ agreements. Since the 9/11 attacks, President Bush has asserted his power to decide how to detain prisoners captured in the Afghan War, to hold any US citizen designated as an ‘army combatant’ without charges and, in a controversial 2002 memo, to authorize interrogators to violate anti-torture laws when necessary to protect national security.
However in 2005, in reaction to Mr. Bush’s stance on torture, senator John McCain filed an amendment to a Defense Department Bill, explicitly stating that the “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of any US detainee is illegal worldwide”. The House gave veto-proof support in 308-122 vote, while the Senate had already approved the provision 90-9. Faced with international pressure resulting from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and accusations of secret CIA prisons, Bush approved the bill and released a statement saying “this is to make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and we adhere to the international convention of torture.”
On the same day that he approved the bill, Bush released a signing statement in which he said “the executive branch shall construe the law in a matter consistent with the constitutional authority of the president…” Mr. Bush’s, signing statement and his subsequent latest veto is proof that he never intended to follow this law. In a country founded on the principles of freedom and equality for all, yet that promises safety and protection to all its citizens, the issue of torture is an inherently ‘American Dilemma.’ The questions loom: 'how to ratify morality with the need for security?' and 'When will the executive reach its limit of power?'