Torture Can Be Acceptable

Thanks for accepting Madara.I will begin by establishing a scenario that I believe allows for the acceptable use of torture, and then I will explain why I believe that.THE SCENARIOThe short way to put this is that it's the old ticking time bomb scenario.The long way goes like this:The CIA captures a high ranking member of ISIS, who is evidenced to have working information of a terror attack that will occur on US soil within 3 hours. They've only had the terrorist in custody for as long as they've known about the impending attack; in other words, they have only 3 hours to try to get information out of this guy that can prevent the attack. Assume that the attack will target a large population center, and will involve a nuclear weapon.Yeah I know what you're thinking. This is hardly a fair circumstance, it's basically fantasy, you say. While I will grant you that this scenario is pretty fantastical and convenient for me, that does not make it invalid. Refer back to my undisputed statements about the burden of proof that I have in this debate:"I need only show that certain situations may warrant torture.."Nothing in there about me needing to prove the likelihood of said situations.As an aside, there are examples of ticking time bomb scenarios that took place in real life, two of which I took a moment to find[1][2].THE JUSTIFICATIONIn this scenario, the interrogators have 4 hours to avert a nuclear detonation. I concede that there are means of questioning/interrogation that are far more effective than torture. However, these alternatives are things that take time; time that the interrogators do not have in this instance."A good interrogation is like a seduction. You sit down. You ask the person questions. You try to develop a very intense personal relationship with another human being so they'll part with information they'd rather not part with. You wheedle, cajole, trick, lie. The point is to collect usable, actionable information." --Chief Warrant Officer Marney Mason (Retired)[3]In this situation, where the terrorist knows he only needs to wait for 3 hours, being talked into giving up information is impossible. However, if the terrorist were to be interrogated, there is a chance that information could be gotten. Torture has worked before[1][2][4];not just in a couple instances, torture was used successfully on a large scale during World War 2[5]. I am not pretending that torture is the best way to extract information, save for this situation, where the more effective means involving knowledge of psychology mixed with questioning would take too long. Because the more preferred methods are not available, we are left with two options. Let the terrorist go untortured and have no chance of preventing an attack that will kill thousands if not millions and affect many more, or torture the man and have a chance of avoiding such an atrocity. In the interests of the greater good, the choice is obvious. In this case, strict application of a moral absolutism opposed to torture can only lead to unnecessary amounts of suffering.Sources:[1] http://www.slate.com...[2] http://www.nydailynews.com...[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com...[4] http://www.thedailybeast.com...[5] http://www.thedailybeast.com...