Sure, it doesn't always work. Some people will also withstand torture and take their secrets to the grave. But "torture doesn't always work" is a far cry from "

Sure, it doesn't always work. Some people will also withstand torture and take their secrets to the grave. But "torture doesn't always work" is a far cry from "torture doesn't work." A more believable amoral/utilitarian argument against torture is that there will always be a more effective method than torture available. That's probably also wrong, but at least it's not so obviously wrong on its face. The problem with the argument is that if a would-be torturer finds evidence that torture is the most effective method in some circumstance, they will feel vindicated in using it. I think a better argument is "regardless of effectiveness, anyone crossing this line is a dangerous and despicable person, and shall be prosecuted."