Bill O'Reilly recently made some interesting logic in defense of torture. I think the logic is good, but should bring us to the exact opposite conclusion he makes. Here's the scenario. Our armed forces have become big fans of using unmanned Predator aircrafts in Pakistan. These drone planes fly in remotely, and are quite good at taking out their target. Unfortunately, there are quite often civilian casualties. But, most people, including a recent guest on O'Reilly's show, claim that to be "acceptable collateral damage", because of how it has allowed us to decimate Al-Qaeda's leadership. So, this guy O'Reilly's interviewing starts railing at O'Reilly for not coming down against waterboarding. O'Reilly paraphrases with, "If we believe this guy has information that will allow us to track down key Al-Qaeda leaders, why wouldn't we?" The guest responds with, "I can't believe you're even thinking about allowing torture." O'Reilly ends with, "You just ok'd the killing of women and children in pursuit of the same result."