Torture - necessary for national security or a gross violation of human rights?

No. Torture is poor at generating accurate information, as it primarily incentivises telling the interrogator what they want to hear rather than anything useful (particularly if you actually have nothing useful to tell). It is also the most debasing and degrading thing that you can do to a human being, it warps horribly both victim and perpetrator, and is generally just deeply, deeply, deeply unpleasant.

Lots of policies might protect against the threat of terrorism. But that doesn't mean you should carry them out.

you, madam, haven't heard of jack bauer.

Torture - necessary for national security or a gross violation of human rights?

No. Torture is poor at generating accurate information, as it primarily incentivises telling the interrogator what they want to hear rather than anything useful (particularly if you actually have nothing useful to tell).

That's why most people now use modern techniques, drugs and intelligence focused interrogation.

No. Torture is poor at generating accurate information, as it primarily incentivises telling the interrogator what they want to hear rather than anything useful (particularly if you actually have nothing useful to tell)..

Modern techniques? I've read about the generally preferred "enhanced interrogation techniques" used today e.g. in Guantanamo, and brushing aside more "traditional" torture methods used in renditions, I don't see what is qualitatively different about modern methods such that they are more likely to generate accurate information. I suppose the focus on psychological degeneration rather than simple pain aversion might do that, but then it might not... I can't say it's my area of expertise particularly it's just what I read. But it was a good source. (Honest.)