Torture is illegal and anathema. Torture is not the mark of a civilized nation. However, we have known for some time that our government engaged in torture of suspects because, we were told, this was the only way of getting information to keep us safe.

Leaving aside the idea, which I beat to death several years ago, that trading safety for civilization is a fool's bargain, for one abandons the latter only to lose the former as a result of abandoning the latter...

This latest round of revelations shows that suspects can, in fact, be questioned effectively without torture, and that the information obtained is more complete and just as reliable. Now, this means we don't get the fun of hurting others and feeling all smug and self-righteous about it, but perhaps an ant colony and a magnifying glass on a sunny day could provide some of that same pleasure, although without the screaming.

In an interview this morning on NPR, one of the Army interrogators who used the non-torture method pointed out that, while torture might have gotten some information, the relationship-building model the Army eventually used got information with tactically valuable add-ons. As he put it, you might get an address out of someone interrogated with torture, but the prisoner who talked without torture would volunteer additional information, like that the house at that address was booby-trapped. A handy thing to know.

So, the scorecard:

Torture: gets some information, maybe.
Relational: gets some information, with tactical details added sometimes.

Torture: illegal.
Relational: legal.

Torture: corrosive to the national soul.
Relational: perfectly in tune with a nation that considers itself a beacon of freedom and justice.

Torture: encourages hatred.
Relational: encourages communication, which is not friendship, but also is not conducive to fostering hatred.

Conclusion: Torture sucks. It's stupid, brutal, ineffective, debasing and corrupting. We should understand this, admit we were wrong, and never do it again.