[gridlock]

"We the People of the United States, in Order to ...provide for the common defence...do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"

The common defense. That is the key.

People are advocating torture in order to prevent individual terrorist acts. While these acts may be brutal and horrible, they do not threaten our common existance as a country.

People are advocating extending the common defence to the point where we are protecting each individual and preventing each individual act of violence. This is a whole different matter, and requires a much heavier hand of government.

Great mischief has been done by various governments in the name of protecting the innocent.

[chrisser]

People are advocating torture in order to prevent individual terrorist acts. While these acts may be brutal and horrible, they do not threaten our common existance as a country.

You can't be serious.

Raising the bar to "threatening our common existance as a country" eliminates defending anything short of a massive nuclear attack.

Further, any war is a series of battles, and none of those individual battles will determine the full outcome. Should all battles with a national enemy be forfeit because none individually threaten the entire country?

Any attempt to inflict mass civilian casualties in order to force action or prevent action on the part of the entire country (a pretty decent definition of terrorism) sure falls under the "common defense" clause in my book.