dying for morality is exactly what to do. that was the nuremburg principle.

channel 4 did a season about the american torture. in it they had a ex cia, mossad and mi5 and asked them if the ticking bomb scenario (where torturing someone had given information about an imminent threat) had ever happened. they all replied, no.

torture acheives nothing. unless of course you believe the witch hunting and spanish inquisition were valid. torture is used in a situation when guilt cannot be proved. that is normally due to lack of evidence. if there was enough evidence then it would be used and a confession would not be needed. it is based on blind guesses. look at the prisoners in guantanamo bay. in there we have a blind cripple who was according to all intelligence in pakistan (he was the taliban's ambassador). kids. another blind man (though that was admittedly done in custody).

and we are talking about an intelligence system so flawed it led to the iraq war and the refusal of entry to cat stevens and the false arrest and torture of many released.

and we are talking about a military which has soldiers such as lindy england and the ones using a website in which they trade porn for pictures of dead iraqis.

is this the system we want to use to decide who deserves torture so bad the US had to ammend it's own position on torture and leave the international court.

and i'll judge any man who tortures another. unless you want to absolve all blame for the nuremburg guilty.