Torture and interrogation

Torture is a tricky subject, just like the death penalty. Torture can be a vital means of getting information, but it's, well... torturing someone. It's like the war in Veitnam. People were against it at the time, but they couldn't know without actually being there, because if they were there, their veiws might have totally changed. So really, I would think that one needs to be in a situation involving extreme torture as ANY kind of informant to make a completely educated descision. But, then again, that's just my opinion.

I believe some torture can be useful but it is very easy to cross the line between torture and abuse.That line is very blurred to be able to see clearly the difference.
When people use it for a form of entertainment it has deffinatly crossed the line but if it is being used in a posative way such as saving thousands of lives from a bomb plot then use it should be used. Not to extremes though, there are many un-extreme ways of using torture.

Has anyone here seen any of the Saw movies? Torture is disgusting, and no matter what someone has done, they don't deserve to have limbs snapped and organs ripped apart.

Obviously, I don't think people should be tortured like they are in horror movies, and I certainly hope nobody has to experience that. I'm a bit torn on the subject, though. I don't want people to be slapped or punched for the sake of getting them to confess something (especially if they are telling the truth in which they didn't actually do anything). At this point, what other options do we have? <-- not a rhetorical question. I am a bit uneducated about other options.