“You can be for torture, but you can’t be for torture and then claim that it’s somehow inappropriately barbaric for ISIS to crucify the innocent. This report clearly shows that the CIA basically broke people’s feet and made them stand on them for days, repeatedly drowned/revived people, froze people to death, anally raped them, threatened to kill women and children, and did everything they could to break them; the report also makes it clear that they did this past the point where even the CIA felt they had any useful information. It was so bad that trained CIA operatives got choked up and cried when they saw it. These weren’t kale-loving hippies; these were CIA and special forces operatives and it was so intense they started crying. Many of these people were completely innocent; even the CIA admits they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. The report makes all this very, very clear.
So like I said, you can be for torture. But if you are then you lose the right to call crucifixions barbarism. Because a thousand times out of a thousand, I’d rather be crucified than what the CIA did to dozens, possibly hundreds of people. Compared to the pain those people suffered, being crucified and getting to die after a few days would be a mercy,” – a Dish reader on a reddit discussion with someone who supports the use of torture.