In Part I of this Article, we first consider some of the strengths and weaknesses of the partially adequate objections. In Part II, we explore torture in light of the biological distinction between pain and suffering and consider the implications of that distinction for our understanding of free will and the fighting spirit. Finally, in Part III, we suggest a more fundamental view of torture that navigates between the Scylla of naive moralizing and the Charybdis of ticking time-bombs. We propose that the debate should focus on torture's effect on our country's moral certainty, on the fighting spirit of our armed forces, and on our overall strategy in combating asymmetric foes and jihadist extremism. This notion of torture will cast an important part of the discussion in sharper relief while providing a clearer norm for those who make and execute policy to defend our nation from terrorism.
Joseph L. Falvey Jr. and Brian D. Eck, Holding the High Ground: The Operational Calculus of Torture and Coercive Interrogation, 32 Campbell L. Rev. 561 (2010).