Torture is always wrong

A large segment of the Blogosphere, including Ginger, are alarmed at the idea that Al Queda suspects might be tortured to reveal information, and that some warbloggers are actually in favour of the idea.

I'm concerned that the are almost certainly people in the Bush administration that condoned the torture carried out in countries like Argentina and Chile in the 1970s and 80s, and have no moral qualms about using such methods themselves.

I wonder how some pro-torture neo-conservatives would feel if it was their loved ones having electrodes attached to their genitals in order to reveal the whereabouts of fugitives from Hilary Clinton's revolutionary regime that took power with the popular uprising following Jeb Bush's "victory" in the blatantly rigged 2008 elections.

OK, so the above is an apocalyptic fantasy scenario I don't expect anyone to sake seriously, but once you start believing "The End Justifies the Means", you're on a slippery slope. If we (and I say 'we' despite the fact I'm British, since Blair has coupled his wagon to Bush's locomotive) allow ourselves to sink morally to the terrorists' level would mean the terrorists will have won in at least one respect.

There's also the fact that if 'we' use torture, it's a green light to every two bit dictator (Mugabe, anyone?) to do the same. And we'll have lost the moral right to condemn him.

We are supposed to be the Good Guys. Once we lose the moral high ground, we might even be on the way to losing the War against Terror, in part, because we'll longer deserve to win.