Not for every educated opinion. The examples I've provided are from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and from European Court of Human Rights. Rather difficult to trump (pardon the pun).

I studied this at university. We found it was almost unanimous that people well-versed in international law, medicine, ethics, etc., regarded waterboarding as torture and regarded torture as unacceptable. You read the Benjamin Franklin quote.

I had a lecturer who's a psychiatrist and an associate professor (or similar) in that field. He was of the opinion that those who engage in torturing are extremely mentally unwell, in need of psychiatric treatment and ill-qualified for their respective roles in the armed forces, police force or whatever.

By the way, disgraceful comment on your part. I pity the state of the world, I'm not smug about it. I'm horrified for the victims of the Brussels attack. Torture would have made no difference. The quality of intelligence gleaned from torture is pisspoor. It's even dangerous to rely upon it.

I'll simply say to you what I said to the other bloke.

Imagine if your spouse was being tortured in some of the most grotesque ways imaginable.

You might feel differently.

In regards to torturer to gain an admission of guilt, then yes you are 100% right.

But if "what they think you want to hear" is the location of potential terrorists preparing to attack innocent civilians then i'm all for it.

It is much more likely that my spouse would be blown up by the idiot screaming Allahu Akbar, torture that fucker any way you want.

It is touching that you still see your professor as the font of all wisdom, one day you will learn that the self-serving opinion of a man who has never done the job speculating about the suitability of others in a field he has never known is worth nothing.

Spot on. Proper concersational interrogation is by far a better method but it takes time. Enhanced methods can be more effective to learn about the next 72 hours.

What "enhanced methods" do you prescribe?

Neither of those contingencies is particularly likely. Thankfully.

As I say, you'd feel differently if your spouse was tortured. And, for what it's worth, (highly unlikely though it is) it's not beyond the realms of possibility. Innocent people have in the past been accused of things that have nothing to do with them. In the UK in the 80s, people merely related to those falsely accused of bombing a pub in Guildford were arrested and (wrongly) found guilty. Those falsely accused were tortured. It's not as implausible as you'd think. And it's precisely why it behoves good people to speak out against the kind of savagery which you're promoting.

And I don't see that professor as the font of all wisdom. I merely value his psychiatric expertise (as one of the leading psychiatrists in Australia) over that of somebody on the internet. This particular bloke has extensive experience treating patients who have been involved in conflict zones (as military personnel, civilians, torture victims, etc.). But by all means, downplay the opinions of the most high-qualified people who also have a bucketload of experience in this area.

I commend you for the work you've done for the armed forces, but it doesn't magically validate your opinion. A bunch of members of my own family have served in various theatres of war, in the British and Australian armies, and they utterly disagree with your stance on torture.

Who is America at war with to use this technique? I also assume nobody sees a problem with the opposing side doing the same thing.

Also, a lot of the right have far more in common with Islamists/sharia than most Muslims do.

Simplistic thinking? You bet.

Boring & Cold.

Everything from certain minorities being second-class citizens (gays etc) to women's role in society through to choice of punishments for offenders/application of violence as displayed in this thread.