The release of the OLC torture memos by the Obama administration last week has proven to be a deeply clarifying event in American politics. Dedicated supporters of torture have responded with a number of tired arguments in favor of torture, the most common being:

1. Waterboarding is not torture.

Waterboarding was invented by torturers as a method of torture. It does not magically become “not torture” just because America is attacked by terrorists. Leaving aside his regrettable past vote against prohibiting CIA torture, Sen. John McCain performed an important service today, stating flat-out that “waterboarding is torture, period.”

2. “Enhanced interrogations” were an effective tool in obtaining intelligence about Al Qaeda.

There is in fact no evidence — apart from the claims of people like Dick Cheney, who I think we can safely say at this point is one of the least credible people in the United States — that “enhanced interrogation” produced any actionable intelligence. All such intel was gleaned before “enhanced interrogation” began, using methods approved in the Army Field Manual, whose standards President Obama has stated will now govern interrogations. Last February, Lt. Gen. Michael Maples of the Defense Intelligence Agency said torture was unnecessary, and that he believed “that the approaches that are in the Army Field Manual give us the tools that are necessary” for conducting effective interrogations.

3. By releasing these memos, President Obama has alerted our enemies to our interrogations methods, allowing them to train to resist them.

All of the methods mentioned in the OLC memos had been publicized long before now.

Simply put, there is not credible argument for the use of these “enhanced” techniques. Whatever information they produced — and again, there’s no evidence that they produced any — is surely outweighed by their functioning as a recruiting mechanism for terrorists.

So the question that needs to be answered is: Why are so many conservatives so committed to torture?

In today’s Wall Street Journal David Rivkin and Lee Casey — who have made something of a cottage industry out of defending the worst actions of the Bush administration — argue that the OLC torture memos released last week by the Obama administration “prove” that the Bush administration did not torture detainees. “Far from ‘green lighting’ torture…the memos detail the actual techniques used and the many measures taken to ensure that interrogations did not cause severe pain or degradation,” they write.

To support their argument, Rivkin and Casey claim that the memos show that the Bush administration made use of waterboarding only on a very limited and controlled basis. The tactics were “harsh,” they acknowledge, but “fall well short of torture.” Anyone claiming otherwise is exaggerating as a result of what they call “speculative rage”:

The memos are also revealing about the practice of “waterboarding,” about which there has been so much speculative rage from the program’s opponents. The practice, used on only three individuals, involved covering the nose and mouth with a cloth and pouring water over the cloth to create a drowning sensation.

This technique could be used for up to 40 seconds — although the CIA orally informed Justice Department lawyers that it would likely not be used for more than 20 seconds at a time. Unlike the exaggerated claims of so many Bush critics, the memos make clear that water was not actually expected to enter the detainee’s lungs, and that measures were put in place to prevent complications if this did happen and to ensure that the individual did not develop respiratory distress.

But as Marcy Wheeler first noted and the New York Times reports today, the OLC memos actually “prove” that waterboarding was used far more often than Rivkin and Casey acknowledge and far more often than the Bush administration previously admitted. Indeed, waterboarding was used “at least 83 times in August 2002 against Abu Zubaydah” and “183 times in March 2003 against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.”

Rivkin and Casey’s defense of waterboarding is puzzling given Rivkin’s recent remarks about the torture technique. In a December 2008 appearance on Al Jazeera English, Rivkin stated emphatically that torture is “always unacceptable” and that in his view “waterboarding is torture“:

RIVKIN: Let me clarify, torture in my view is always unacceptable, and in fact I frankly think characterizing American interrogation policy, or debates about interrogation policy, as torture is misleading. … Torture is defined somewhat imprecisely in international law, but basically, in my view, waterboarding is torture.

Watch it:

This morning on Fox News, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) responded to the startling information — first noted by blogger Marcy Wheeler — that detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times. “It’s unacceptable,” McCain said, adding:

One is too much. Waterboarding is torture, period. I can ensure you that once enough physical pain is inflicted on someone, they will tell that interrogator whatever they think they want to hear. And most importantly, it serves as a great propaganda tool for those who recruit people to fight against us.

McCain later reiterated his point, “The image of the United States of America throughout the world is a recruiting tool for Islamic extremists.” Watch it:

Despite his outspoken advocacy against torture, he said it was a “serious mistake” for the Obama administration to release the torture memos. “The release of these memos helps no one, doesn’t help America’s image, does not help us address the issue.” Obama adviser David Axelrod said the president’s belief in “the law and his belief in transparency” ultimately convinced him to release the memos.

McCain touted his sponsorship of the Detainee Treatment Act, which “prohibited torture.” In fact, that legislation contained a loophole permitting CIA agents to continue engaging in torture.