I assume some of the people tortured were terrorists, willing to blow themselves up to kill americans. If they don't value their lives, why should we value theirs? Especially if they are trying to kill us? Second, I'm sure that Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc. don't follow the rules that the Western world sets and fewer people hate them for their larger human rights violations than the torture of a few innocents that the US committed. I'm fine with the torture, although I'd hope they get better at determining innocent vs. guilty.

I'm halfway through reading it right now and I have to tell you it's quite sickening to say the least. Even though torture or "enhanced interrogation" is allowed to coerce prisoners at that level, the information they actually received from those methods was consistently wrong or was about information that they didn't even need. I mean for god sake the CIA even recognized that torture does not yield very accurate information and yet they continued to use the methods. So one case that I read in the report is that they captured this developmentally challenged kid and used him as leverage to get information out of his parents. They tortured him for thirty days and would send videos of him crying until the parents coughed up the information and the information they got was wrong. Not only is that morally wrong to use an innocent person as leverage to gain information but it is also illegal under US guidelines due to his lack of mental competency. So in short I really don't think it should be legal because it yields no results and it will always be subject to abuse, no matter the country.

no, it wasn't right to release the documents. it was political posturing to help the democratic party, plain and simple. should what be legal? you forgot the subject in your question.