Matt Yglesias writes about the unconvincing case for torture. I keep reading arguments, many of them from folks with solid experience in this area, who say torture does not produce useful intelligence; that its only real value is the way it was used on John McCain: To try and extract false confessions for political advantage. And I keep reading arguments for torture from folks who act like it's inarguable that torture is a great tool, especially for quashing "ticking time bomb" scenarios. What I'd like to see is the latter group seriously address the assertions of the former.