John McCain's Bias Against Waterboarding and Ignorance to the Geneva Convention?

During the CNN hosted YouTube debate, John McCain accused the United States of torturing known terrorists with waterboarding. This statement not only proves that he is not presidential material; it also proves that he has no business being a US Senator. I was once an admirer of John McCain, but since the last Republican debate, I have found him to be ignorant of the Geneva Convention, which is irrelevant when dealing with radical Islamic terrorists.

The Geneva Convention does not protect cowardly terrorists who deliberately kill civilians rather than uniformed troops. In fact, this document was created to discourage this sort of thing. Therefore, John McCain is in error to make such a statement. Has his Vietnam POW experience confused his judgment? I believe that waterboarding is form of punishment, not torture. Believing this makes me wonder, what exactly does the senator and the rest of the U.S. Congress consider to be torture?

Is throwing a convicted criminal in jail torture, or is it punishment? How about sentencing a killer to death -- punishment or torture? Since the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to terrorists, I don't believe that torturing or punishing them is illegal, especially when they have information that could prevent a nuclear attack. Besides, to my knowledge no one has died from waterboarding. This might have something to with the fact that government doctors are on site during the waterboarding process. So if the U.S. needs to water board a terrorist for some vital information, it not only has my permission; it has my blessing.

If the United States Government wishes to pass a law to protect terrorists from waterboarding, then perhaps congress should attempt it. In fact, maybe the Senate and House should secretly attach a provision to the Massachusetts no-spanking-children law to protect terrorists from being spanked too. After all, if spanking a child is torture, not punishment, then shouldn't terrorists be protected from spanking as well. What about tasers? Should they be outlawed? If it is legal to electrocute an moral person for asking a question, like the "Don't tase me bro" guy, isn't it legal to tase an immoral terrorist to answer a question? Or is it just legal to electrocute United States citizens and not terrorists? And what about pepper spray -- the chemical that causes temporary blindness. Surely the United States can use that on terrorists since it is used own the American public, right? Or does U.S. Congress think of that as torture too? Funny, it seems that the U.S. Government is more concerned about terrorists than its own population that it swore to protect.