There's a world of difference between the actions of a few rotten apples in an imperfect nation, who we try to punish, and state sponsored torture as pictured above. One also has to remember that the enemy combatants at Guantanamo were captured on the battlefield.
Here's what the American Bar Association has to say. Here's some commentary on the President's constitutional authority, and a recent news story on the review of the cases of all detainees. Some additional commentary over at cageprisoners from last year's election campaign. And more about the Geneva Conventions. Over at volokh.com, David Kopel comments:
The more plausible analogy to Guantanamo is British interrogation of Irish Republican Army suspects in the early 1970s. Then, the British extracted confessions through "the five techniques": wall-standing, hooding, continuous noise, deprivation of food, and deprivation of sleep. The European Court of Human Rights, in the 1978 case Republic of Ireland v. United Kingdom, ruled that the techniques did not constitute "torture," but were "inhuman and degrading," in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Update: Another torture story here. HT NRO
Update: Read Mark Steyn