text: do you think the us should cry foul when our men are tortured but torure others? the committee is concerned by allegations that the state party has established secret detention facilities, which are not accessible to the international committee of the red cross. detainees are deprived of fundamental legal safeguards, including an oversight mechanism in regard to their treatment and review procedures with respect to their detention. the committee is also concerned by allegations that those detained in such facilities could be held for prolonged periods and face torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. the committee considers the “no comment” policy of the state party regarding the existence of such secret detention facilities, as well as on its intelligence activities, to be regrettable. (articles 2 and 16) the state party should ensure that no one is detained in any secret detention facility under its de facto effective control. detaining persons in such conditions constitutes, per se, a violation of the convention. this is the slippery slope. how do we demand that other countries do not torture our soldiers, if we have no problem torturing theirs? this was the basis for the geneva convention. everything is fair game during the battle, but, if captured, you were effectively taken out of the war, and as such, would then be treated in a more humane manner. a principle, that i think, a lot of countries strived to maintain as best they could. was every prisoner treated humanely?  of course not. any time you throw humans into the mix, you aren't going to have perfection...no matter how noble the idea. but to have a government itself support the concept of torture, invites other countries to do the same. is this really what we want for our soldiers? anyhow, i don't think torture is a very effective tool. physical, anyhow. people can only withstand so much pain before saying anything just to make it stop. including making things up. there are more effective tactics out there.