Do you mind if I respond to you as well?
You are right that a lot of people feel that Col. West faced a moral dilemma. The fact is, everyone who feels that way is completely wrong. The UCMJ exists to prevent personal feelings from getting in the way of an officer or soldier carrying out their sworn duty. Civilians continue to make the mistake of looking through the prism of public society when considering military procedure. The military is NOT a democracy. It is a meritorious dictatorship. No one in the military has the right to disobey a lawful order. When in doubt and unsure, you carry it out, and report your objections AFTER the fact. If you do not carry out an order you feel is unlawful, and you are wrong, you face Court Martial. It is very simple.
Yes, there are stupid laws. Stupid laws are changed, when soldiers prove them stupid through carrying them out anyway to a negative conclusion. They do not get changed by the refusal of one Officer to carry out those laws.
Judge Moore was wrong for almost the same reason. It was not his choice to make in deciding not to obey a judicated law. As an officer of the court, he has a deeper responsibility to uphold and obey laws, even those he does not agree with. There will always be conflicts between the laws of man vs the laws of our God.
Col. West knowingly broke a law, although for good reason. He made a choice and should suffer for it, because that choice had already been made for him, and he failed his duty.
And it is also a mistake to look at this entire situation like a traditional war against a military enemy rather than as an engagement against a bunch of terrorist thugs. These people are not "prisoners of war"; they are unlawful enemy combatants and part of a terrorist organization that at all times constitutes and immediate and credible threat to the safety of the troops.
In a situation where the leadership there was aware of an impending ambush and other attacks, and knew that the prisoner knew the details, it was imperative that they took necessary actions to protect the troops. The Colonel didn't use torture, he used intimidation. Did he go too far? I'm not sure. If he had started cutting off body parts and tossing them into vats of pork by-product waste, that might have been "going too far" but I don't know for sure. What I do know is that he got the information without torturing or killing a slimebag that would have been happy to torture our troops if given the opportunity. He saved the lives of troops under his command with these actions.