This message was self-deleted by its author

[malthaussen]

76. Depends on how you define "normal."

In a situation of immediate danger, where tactical information could save the lives of you and your team, it would not be remarkable that a prisoner might be subject to some severe torture to extract that information. Just as it would be not unusual that a tactical situation might dictate killing prisoners.

The key word, though, is "tactical." Or, you might substitute "in the heat." That is what makes the US use of torture remarkable. It was done in cold blood, without any tactical necessity. Though the apologists liked to claim that "vital information" was extracted by these methods, they are unwilling to show proof, and thus must be held suspect. This is not to say, by the way, that the ends would justify the means if they could be demonstrated. But the "we were afraid" apologetic works better when people are actually shooting at you, rather than when applied to systematic, cold-blooded abuse in the safety of one's own prison.

-- Mal