Majority in U.S. say CIA interrogation methods were justified

Interogations at the time were justified because no one knew what was next. This report is Monday Morning Quarterbacking the actions of an agency who failed to prevent 9/11, in their eyes never again meaning whatever it takes.

I'm curious about the questions asked in the poll. Was it "can torture be justified?" or was it "was the torture of al-Qaeda leaders justified?"

I think the torture wasn't justified because it has diminishing returns and out of principle, but I will never lose sleep because Khalid Sheikh Mohammed feared for his life during his interrogation.

I have no problem with them doing whatever it takes to find out all they knew. These were barbaric people who for the most part didn't deserve to live long enough to get fed.

25% of those tortured turns out were not jihadis at all. But I guess you've got to break a few eggs and all.

That was my attitude when the whole thing came to light. I'm of the mindset that "Better 100 guilty men should go free rather than one innocent be punished".

And since then, things like Abu-Ghraib are thought to be the direct result of ISIS's rise. I can't see how people can say that prison was justified, but then be outraged at beheadings in the news. I don't think there is justification for either act.

Torture never produces the results intended, and brutal beheadings only serve to incite people against your cause.

I doubt that ISIS came about because of torture, although Abu Graib might have been a good recruiting tool.

I find it hard to argue with torture if there is imminent threat and it would save lives. But, many people say torture doesn't produce reliable info anyway, this report says so too. And then yes, there's the problem of torturing innocents

The usual suspects defending these actions by the CIA are the ones who whine whinge and wail about those dirty Muslim countries practicing torture. It seems we are on the side of the Angels, even when we act like Devils.