The Trouble With Torture.

After the release of a series of Bush administration memos on the legality of "enhanced interrogation techniques," the battle over torture has returned with a vengeance.

Conservatives tend to believe that torture is a necessary evil. It isn't pretty -- but it saves lives. According to conservative news sources, information extracted via waterboarding from 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed helped prevent a major terrorist attack on L.A.

Liberals assert that torture is morally wrong and damages America's standing in the world. The strongest opponents of torture would love to see Bush and Co. stand trial for war crimes.

Clearly, the President has to make some tough calls when it comes to keeping Americans safe. When thousands of innocent lives hang in the balance, the morality of torture doesn't seem so black and white.

If Obama knew he could save a city by subjecting a scary bearded man to intense physical discomfort, would he really stick to his principles?

Then again, can anyone ever be sure that torture will produce life-saving information?

By any measure, torture is a great way to get people to talk. Inflict enough pain, and someone will tell you what you want to hear. But what if the truth isn't what you want to hear? What if Mr. Death To America really doesn't know anything?

Then you get stuck with a steaming heap of bad intelligence. In fact, according to a new report from the Senate Armed Services Committee, much of Bush's faulty intelligence on the link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda came out of torture sessions.

When you get right down to it, torture is a questionable tool at best. If the clock is ticking on an impending terror attack, torturing a bad guy could prevent the destruction. But it could also horribly mislead law enforcement and accomplish nothing.

Perhaps when the stakes are high enough, some just prefer a dubious gamble to nothing at all.