Since none of the pro torture people answered this question posed by Orion and myself, let me start a new post where this is the premise specifically we are debating.
If the government or the proponents of torture are only looking to save lives, why are you not arguing for the outlaw of the automobile. There is no basic human right that says anyone is entitled to drive or ride in an automobile. You could save Far more people by outlawing the automobile than you could by torturing any suspected terrorist. over 500,000 people have died in an automobile related accident since 1994.
over 40,000 people in the US each year die as a result of this machine, yet it is not outlawed, you can operate on at 16 years of age, and when mixed with an over the couter drug, Alcohol, is just as deadly as a bullet or a bomb.
So again to re-emphasise, why do you feel it is ok to violate someones basic human rights with an act of evil (torture) in the name of saving a life, when you do not feel it is the right choice to outlaw an automobile which there is no basic human right violated. It would be inconvenient as hell sure, but you could at least sleep at night, and you would do more to saving lives.