Torture: it's a word that conjures images of thumb-screws, lit matches under fingernails--before the nails are ripped out--and the agonizing screams of the damned on Earth. In the Middle Ages it was not simply common, but used as a form of combination punishment-entertainment. And now? Is there a place for it now, in so-called 'Modern times'?

It's easy to say 'no.' We're not savages anymore; we're not living in squalor in the Middle Ages and killing people for speaking out against the Church, or the King. (Or are we?)

We don't want to 'stoop to the level' of our enemies, losing our humanity, the moral advantage, in the process. (Or do we already?)

Should we use torture? Have we used it? Are we already using it? Have others used it against us?

What do you think?

I'd bet most people think yes, yes, and yes.

And they'd probably be correct.

We know that our prisoners have been tortured in nearly every war we've been in since our nation was founded. I've read some stories from Vietnam that might keep some people up at night, so horrific were they. And with the degradations at Abu Ghraib, and what most of us suspect is done behind closed doors over-seas, I think it's reasonably safe to assume that, on occasion, we inflict pain on our enemies to get information, or gain an advantage.

But is it necessary?

If a 'dirty bomb' was going to go off in Manhatten and kill a million people, would it be allowable to torture a prisoner so we might locate it, and prevent it?

If your young daughter was going to be raped and murdered, unless a man was tortured to let the police know where to find her, would that be acceptable?

I think we all know what the answer is, only no one wants to say it.

As a father, I'd be willing to turn my head so whatever had to be done was done so my daughter's life would be saved. No hesitation. No question.

As an American, I'd be willing to forgive one incident of torture so that Manhatten might be saved. I'm certain many Manhattenites would agree.

Hell, wouldn't you? Wouldn't anyone?

Personally--and this might sound awful--but I'd almost rather have this done illegally, and on the sly, than have it condoned by some law we've concocted to allow it (as was recently proposed). As long as it's illegal it would be done with discretion, and only in times of extreme emergency for fear of exposure or punishment by those who did it. As long as it was illegal, it would be hushed-up, so the fragile National Psyche of our country would be protected, which is something we, as Americans, seemingly need.

God, it sound so horrible, even just typing it here in my study, but think about it. If your life was the one on the chopping block, and it would take someone (a very bad and evil person, by the way) to be tortured to save you--well, wouldn't you naturally wish that the ban on torture could be ignored just this once to save you?

Do you think Daniel Pearl's widow thinks so? Do you think the families of those who died in 9/11 think so?

Ask yourself what you really would wish for. If you can honestly say you'd rather die than have someone tortured to save you, or that you'd sacrifice your family to preserve the humanity of being a non-torturer, then I guess you're a better person than I am.

Because I know, deep inside, what I would wish would happen.

Only just don't tell me about it afterwards. Unfortunately--and like most Americans--my fragile psyche would not be able to handle it.