What?

I really don't get this argument at all. Wouldn't our adversaries say the exact same of American soldiers in their custody, that they "have" to torture them so that the soldiers can give up the information honorably? Woulnd't they say that they're doing our soldiers a favor? That sure seems to be what Thiessen and May imply. Seems to me that arguments for torture that are just as easy for our enemies to make, are probably not the best arguments a torture apologist would want to use.