What is your principal objection to Torture?

[Silent3]

86. How is your response relevant to what I just wrote?

The types of situations you listed where torture wasn't effective were already the kinds of situations that I started my post by agreeing it wasn't effective.

Is it your position that the kind of scenario I propose only exists in "the realm of fiction"? If so, then why start your response to my post with inapplicable examples that don't counter the hypothetical situation I offered instead of getting right to the more relevant point?

I said nothing, by the way, about how frequent or infrequent the type of scenario I proposed is likely to occur -- so, to make that clear, I don't think it would be very common, especially when it comes to the types of prisoner interrogations we're talking about our government being involved with.

Since no one compiles statistics on this kind of thing, however, I don't see any reason to decide that situations like my hypothetical example are so vanishingly rare that they only ever happen in fiction. I'd guess that such torture situations are more likely to occur, when they do, in (non-governmental) criminal and gang activity.

Since the very start of my post was to say "My objection is moral", if you then read an argument that torture might sometimes, nevertheless, be effective, as an imagined qualification -- as if I were saying, "but when it is effective, then it is moral" that's not me saying that, that's you incorrectly inferring it.