There are literally scores of statements and comments made by pols and military professionals over the last 120 or so years regarding torture and its applications, effects, and morality. Pretty much all of them say what General Davis said above.

The fact that we used it - in an unorganized way in Iraq - at least until Geoff Miller showed up - and in a much more organized and criminal way at Gitmo and the various "black" sites in Eastern Europe, Bagram, and who-knows-where-else makes the Dick Chaney types and others - including neocons like Eliot Cohen - even more despicable and evil than ever.

I bet the Bushies and their cronies in evil couldn't even conceive of the term (evil) being applied to them - it's for use against darker-skinned guys with towels on their heads. I hope that folks really understand the truly disgusting things that were done in our name, with our tax dollars, for our "protection."

There's nothing better than giving a wild eyed Al-Qaeda killer three hots, a cot, a prayer rug, and his very own team of ACLU attorneys to file pleadings on his behalf. Plus supply him with warm falafel and and an occasional Jew to abuse. Preferably the Jew will be from the Likud Party, but a Kadima member will suffice in a pinch. After all, it's those damn Jews who caused all this mess by continuing to exist and building settlements that are forbidden by the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Torture, rough treatment, punches in the nose, Metallica songs, ham sandwiches, or female prison guards are definitely, absolutely, positively out. After all, they'd never do anything like that to us.

....at the location of its commission. No matter how you clean the blood from the site or was the smell from the process, its stench remains in the structure in the form of memory. No act of Congress or scare from the Senate can change or deoderize it.

This make its imperative that the site be changed into a potter's field of sorts or a meadow. Its victims be moved elsewhere.

Torture works. If someone stresses me and then ask if I am from planet Neptune, i will say yes and digress on the terrain features of a planet that does not exist. If he asks for the PIN number to my ATM card, I guarantee he will get it if he breaks my fingers open with a hammer. It is a focussed question with an answer. Yes, a hot cup of coffee builds rapport. People that dismiss the effectiveness of coercion, have idealist visions of the afternoon. However, anything done stupidly is a bad idea.

Jaffir

There are significant downsides to traumatizing prisoners and, frankly, there is almost never a single question worth the trouble. I have never heard of a real ticking bomb scenario. If one comes up, sure, all bets are off. However, focused coercion gets answers. The key thing is, do you have the right question. coercion becomes an temptation when you have no intel. Its the thing you can do to catch up the deficit.

I am sure that the Frog paras feel bad about some of the things they did in Algeria. I am also certain the US Marines who assaulted okinawa regret a few of the things they did.No one walks away from this and doesnt carry a burden. Nothing is a heavier burden though, then losing a war.

I also don't buy the its-just-wrong argument. You can lie up in an ambush and shoot an Afghan flat as he is walking to take a pee but you can't waterboard him? If I were the afghan, i'd much rather be waterboarded than shot through the skull.

I see you are of the "quantity beats quality" camp. Make your point, then shut the hell up and let other people have their say. Nobody wants to read all JSNAIKO all the time, not even 5 out of the last 14 posts. Out.

when is it OK to torture? who is it OK to torture? why don't t we torture criminals in the US? how about suspected criminals? how about REALLY suspected criminals?? what's a criminal? what is a law? should torture techniques be lawful? which ones?

anyone who seriously reflects on it and still honestly endorses torture is probably a SOCIOPATH who would unwittingly advocate FOR THEIR OWN TORTURE, and intelligent men wrote the CONSTITUTION to protect the rest of society from them. torturers and the people who are tortured by them are not abstractions. of course torture works in certain circumstances, on some people, for a certain amount of time, for a certain end goal. but it is PROVEN that in totality it is INEFFECTIVE compared to intelligent techniques, for the brain is mightier than the instinct for CRUELTY and vengeance. furthermore, when you torture YOU CEDE THE MORAL HIGH GROUND, which means ceding LEGITIMACY. but the real point is--ARE YOU IN FACT A TORTURER? if you are not, then why would you advocate torture techniques? unlike Cheney and company, i only support a war that i myself would serve in.

more to the point, i only support interrogation techniques that i myself could survive without physical and psychological harm in case i was an INNOCENT MAN under suspicion of HEINOUS CRIMES.

what, are you really gonna argue that it doesn't happen? that only the guilty get tortured? so you don't mind being tortured if you're guilty? i suppose if you're guilty of being an occupying soldier in a foreign land and warriors capture you, they should be allowed to drill into you a little bit, since you are guilty and possess key information. and even after you gave everything up, how would they know? they might keep drilling you for a little while longer. i suppose that's life in the big city, huh, boys? yeah.

but thanks to the guys who wrote the Constitution, sociopathic personalities will get weeded out eventually even if they manage to win an election or two and pass some laws to codify their inhumanity,