[Razion]

I must admit, I didn't read everything word for word but I did go through the most of it. I agree with you on the points about the Geneva Convention. (I printed it a few years ago but sadly forgot most of it.)

Firstly, I'm going to agree with Arthur. Torturing someone does not ensure credible information. To me, Tim's argument sounds like he is pushing it pretty much as the only way to go. I think he could be neglecting the fact that army intel these years are very advanced and probably more capable of giving more accurate information.

Moving on to the topic of why someone would want to torture a captive. This has a lot to do with the framing of a situation and the willpower of the individual in my opinion. After all, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Both sides believe in what they fight for and are fully aware of what they are getting themselves into. With that conviction and the intelligence armies have, torture doesn't sound like a valid method of obtaining information.

Virtue is usually assumed to lie with either one side or the other. However, a good portion of the time, it really is in a grey area. You can't really say if someone is completely right or completely wrong.

._. I hope I made just a little bit of sense.