[kahljorn]

all i know is without torture there's a fairly large chance that 85% of the wars in the past could've had a different outcome. I mean really, when it comes down to getting information about the enemy there's only a few ways. Spies, traitors and torture. I think it's ridiculous to imagine winning a war on "terror", against a group that functions under stealth, without any type of information.

Also let's play the justify game. Let's imagine that bush had tortured a terrorist involved in the planning of 9/11 before it even happened, and managed to prevent 9/11. That's thousands of lives saved, is it then justifiable?
The reason I ask is because information generally "Saves lives". Whether it's from knowing where they will attack, or knowing where and how to attack them, information saves guys.

Just so you guys know torture has always been going on in every war since time immemorial, it's like when your brother stole your favorite toy so you twisted his arm till he told you where it was. i also agree that people who torture other people have the capacity to become something disgusting, but I can't say for sure.

I think preechr started to bring up that the torture techniques they use aren't really that severe. It's not like we're putting them in Iron Maidens or something. I'm willing to bet most of the torture they do is psychological, like sleep deprivation. I could be wrong, though.