Originally Posted by Willravel

I don't vote for that particular dog owner to walk his dog near your house nor do I pay taxes to fund his walks nor do I have a stake in the response to said shitting. But you know all of this. I'm left wondering why you'd intentionally use an incorrect illustration like this. Are you really ignorant to your role in torturing? You are many things, but naive isn't one of them.

"I don't approve of torture, but I'm fine with it". Where do you draw the line between approving of something and being fine with it? In what way are those different?

And if you look at something from the side, squinting your eyes a bit, you can find yourself taking two opposing positions on the same issue.

It is, of course, perfectly simple. Torture has no place but masochism or vengeance. Those are really the only functions it can adequately perform. It cannot yield reliable information, it cannot reliably coerce, and it cannot control. It has absolutely no functional use for military or intelligence. Beyond questioning it's function is judging it ethically, which is something you claim to have not done at all, despite saying you're fine with torture and that you don't approve of it.

Your position is at best unclear.