We're not going to agree on this one, PV, and that's fine.
Those beheadings can hardly be classed as torture.
So I can assume that if there is an Islamic militant in custody, known to have information about a major deadly attack coming up in America, or anywhere else, you would be opposed to putting any pressure on said enemy to extract information and prevent innocents from being slaughtered?
Sorry, these people (not unlike the Japanese) attacked America first. They declared war. They are the enemy. They are out to destroy civilization as we know it. War is not pretty, not for the faint of heart, but sometimes it is a necessary route that must be taken.
Torture of the enemy is part of war. I guess if you consider torture uncivilized and barbaric, you must really flip out when the enemy is actually killed. I guess we need ol' Jocelyn Elders and her "safer bullets".
Torture is part of war? Not according to pretty much every civilized country in the world. That's why we have things like the Geneva convention.
Hey, like I said, if you condone torture, whatver--I think it's barbaric--but just don't let me catch you pissing and moaning when it happens to Americans.