What US Generals used to think of Torture

Tom Ricks, over at Foreign Policy, posts a quote made by US Army Maj. Gen. George Davis, who in 1902 lambasted all who, at the time, believed water-boarding was not torture and that "enhanced interrogation techniques" were acceptable in the face of international obligations.

No modern state, which is a party to international law, can sanction, either expressly or by a silence which imports consent, a resort to torture with a view to obtain confessions, as an incident to its military operations. If it does, where is the line to be drawn? If the ‘water cure' is ineffective, what shall be the next step? Shall the victim be suspended, head down, over the smoke of a smouldering fire; she he be tightly bound and dropped from a distance of several feet; shall he be beaten with rods; shall his shins be rubbed with a broomstick until they bleed?