"If I'm not the leader?

If I am not directly in control of whether this is put into practice or not?

If they are raiders, and not members of our group?

If we are otherwise happy, and free from tyranny from our leadership?

If they were doing it out of ignorance for how the human mind responds, or because they truly believed that there was valuable information to be gained, and this was a way to get it?

Yeah. I'd be upset about it, I'd disagree loudly to leadership about it. I would verbally condemn it... but then I'd go eat a sandwich or something, and wash my hands of it. It's not a call I would make, but in this scenario I'm not making the calls. It's only opinion that lumps me into being a part of it even though I don't actively participate.
"

"I don't think torture is all that valuable. They may not know anything to start with. They're being sent to do someone else's bidding. They'll probably say anything to make it stop. What information can you even trust out of torture? I think people cross the line with torture and the information is unreliable. If I were them, I would tell so many truths, untruths and outright lies that it would be incredibly diffiult to figure out what was true and what was lie.
"

"So what is the point of torturing them if you know they'll probably lie?"

"Are you willing to kill someone with a bullet to the head to save the ones you love at 100 yards?

If you said yes, but would balk at doing so at 1 yard, you are not dealing in morals, but feelings.

If killing is justified to protect your family, then less than killing should be preferable. Torture is less than killing.

So, if you are willing to cap the threat at range, but balk when it is torture - assuming the goal is the same (protection of you and yours), then your ethical issues are false and based on nothing more than how it makes you feel not any kind of higher standard. After all, for the victim, torture is better than a round to the head at any distance."

"I will show mercy when it is warranted. But on people that just tried to kill my group and won't answer simple or any questions. Well they lost that mercy.
Hell tell me you know nothing about the warlord but then tell me anything you do know. You have to know something no matter how trivial it may seem.
But being quiet isn't the answer."

"How do they know if your group is any safer than the warlord? And don't you prove you're just as bad as the warlord when you torture prisoners? There have got to be better tactics to get information.

I doubt you would find torture acceptable means of gaining information if it were your own loved one being tortured."

"(1) For some death would be preferable as the remnants of that torture can shred the ability to live a semi-normal or decent life.
(2) Plus while most humans are capable of causing harm in the heat of the moment it's different when you no longer have that immediate Do Or Die need.
(3) Not commenting on the morality thing but the difference between cold blooded killing and hot blooded killing is pretty clear. Almost all human beings are capable of one if you get them angry enough to lose control.

"