[Paul_Denton]

The way I see it. If a nuke is planted in a major City and it took torture to find out where the nuke was planted then I would say yes, then do it.

[BikerNYC]

If a nuke is planted in a major City and it took torture to find out where the nuke was planted then I would say yes, then do it.

It is human fallibility that is the problem. How would you know that torture would reveal to you where the nuke was planted? How certain of success would you have to be before you tortured someone? If there was a 50% chance that the person about to be tortured had information about the nuke, would that be enough? 10% chance?

[Little Ray]

If wiring a terrorist's scrotum would save one life, American, Iraqi, or even French, I would say ... "Red is positive, black is negative..."

[Melas]

The way I see it. If a nuke is planted in a major City and it took torture to find out where the nuke was planted then I would say yes, then do it.

The problem with that argument is that it is predicated on the assumption that the person being tortured has the whereabouts of the nuke. While that sounds good, it's unlikely. If you knew for certain that your prisoner knew were the nuke was, chances are that you would know where it was anyway. Worst case scenerio here is that you would torture a man who knew nothing, and the bomb went off any way. I would have a hard time explaining that one away.