Yes it was. And it produced massive suffering on a Civilian population.
That's the point. with a State actor, you can end the killing, by fighting a war.However, sometimes civilians suffer extremely (like radiation poisoning...) because of it.
And that is to save MILITARY LIVES.
Now take your garden variety terrorist Ahole. every moment he withholds information, another civilian target may be at risk.
How is it, then, that you can consider the collateral damage done to civilians during a war, fair game, but not the deliberate inflicting of pain, on someone actively targeting civilians in an Undeclared war?
Ever hear of "res ipsa loquitur"?
You just said it.
The collateral damage done civilians in a state of declared war is not torture, per se.
Even spies are not tortured. They are given a trial and killed outright.
I wouldn't condone torture in a declared war, why would I condone it in an undeclared war?