This simple questions seems to be beyond numerous presumably well educated members of the American military brass and their lawyers. Come on, fellows, it either is or it isn't.

Why is a seemingly simple question so difficult to answer? Is it because it would place many of them in a very uncomfortable position having employed the technique?

What are your views on the legitimacy of waterboarding?

From Wikipedia,

"Although waterboarding can be performed in ways that leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries (including broken bones) due to struggling against restraints, and even death.[4] The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last for years after the procedure.[5]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

I don't think this type of torture should be employed as it can have side-effects that can last for the whole of your life. Such a form of torture should be employed only in extreme cases.

Anything that causes extreme pain or has negative side effects is a form of torture in my opinion. As for the Wikipedia reference, that's not really a reliable source due to the fact that it can be edited by anyone, however, it does give a good idea of what it is.

I'm not an expert on the subject, so all the info there might indeed be 100% accurate, but anyway I looked it up using a more reliable source and stumbled upon this: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1015...erboarding

And that article confirms that it's torture. Also if you think about it, assume you were the one that was receiving this "treatment" it indeed would feel like torture. And while it may not be as brutal as other things, it still tortures the individual, therefore is a form of torture. Whether it's legal or not is the other issue that has to be answered.

It was considered torture previously when other nations used it. Didn't the US consider it torture when the Japanese used it against enemies captives?