Re the irrationality. Tom says that I have said no useful information comes from torture. His words -

"This is consistent with your position that torture doesn't work as an information source, but you can't believe that and the military usefulness of North Vietnamese torture at the same time."

The was clearly a personal "you", not collective, as it's addressed to the person who posted the original comment. I have never said that, nor do I believe it. It can't be described as anything but a lie about me. Tom made it up so as to avoid the original question, which is what he usually does. Takes off on tangents, sets up straw men, or goes "ad hominem".

It seems especially counterproductive (read "chickenshit") to simply make things up, though. And he's being spoken for as moderator of CE. Go figure.

RobVG, in attempting to respond, obfuscates. The point is simple - is it "right" to torture enemies to obtain useful information? The Germans did it in WWII, the Soviets did it, the US in Vietnam, the US in Iraq, the US in Afghanistan, and so on.

And if one said it wasn't "right" for the North Vietnamese to torture Americans, then, obviously, it's not "right" for the US to be torturing Iraqis. But that's the basis for seemingly endless "isolated" abuses.

FrankC posits that since I regard the black-and-white thinking of conservatives as limiting, I should not ask a "yes or no" question. According to FranKC it would be unreasonable of me to ask a conservative if a light were on or off. He was silly AND irrational.

The sad part is that torture does the torturing country far more harm than good. A few lives may be saved, and the cost stratigically is enormous. The US is willing to spend thousands of lives for Iraqi oil, for instance. The violent deaths of 50,000 or so Americans every year in traffic accidents is not at all bothersome.

What the US has lost in moral leadership is far more than that gained by torture. The global "mission" is more important than any life. If bringing 'em back alive were the be all and end all, they wouldn't be over there, there wouldn't be "acceptable" losses.

And it's not "right" to torture anyone except in the "hot pursuit" sense. That's the answer to the question conservatives won't answer. And lie to avoid answering.

Arf