You assume that you can easily identify who is guilty and who is not. How do you make sure the person in your hand is guilty in the first place? Do you know that "almost half of 212 Afghan prisoners (in Gitmo) either innocent or forced to fight for Taliban"? [1] How many of them tortured for information they don't have?
There are many countries where people suffer from dictators and oppressing regimes. US (and US citizens) shouldn't give those regimes an excuse for their actions by defending torture for any reason. Those dictators are telling people that they torture for the benefit of the society, to save multiple lives etc. Don't be like them.
Comments
You assume that you can easily identify who is guilty and who is not. How do you make sure the person in your hand is guilty in the first place? Do you know that "almost half of 212 Afghan prisoners (in Gitmo) either innocent or forced to fight for Taliban"? [1] How many of them tortured for information they don't have?
There are many countries where people suffer from dictators and oppressing regimes. US (and US citizens) shouldn't give those regimes an excuse for their actions by defending torture for any reason. Those dictators are telling people that they torture for the benefit of the society, to save multiple lives etc. Don't be like them.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-file...
[deleted]
In that case, consider the empirical argument: Torture doesn't work!
If someone has some information that you desperately need them to cough up, there are better ways to go about it.
Really, why on earth would you take actions that don't make sense to get information you don't need for reasons that don't exist?