OK, I'll bite.
We will never know whether and how much the "coerced interrogations" contributed to finding Osama. My gut reaction is that it was probably worth doing to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. However I believe that decision should be made explicitly at the presidential level and should have been applied to a mere handful of unquestionably complicit top level people like KSM. The Bush 2 administration made it a matter of routine policy, leading to travesties like Abu Ghraib and thus inflicted grave political damage upon the reputation of the U.S. as a result. That damage leads to lack of cooperation from countries/sources that might have helped us and allows Islamic militants to argue, "They are no different from us" and perhaps to recruit more effectively.
In WWII we did a good job of retaining the moral high ground vs. Germany and Japan. I've read that the British developed subtle psychological interrogation techniques that were very effective in gaining valuable info from German prisoners, probably more effective than the crude methods used by the Nazis.
The "War on Terror" has military and diplomatic components and both are crucial. The Bush 2 administration thought only the former was needed, while Jimmy Carter is the perfect example of the opposite view. We need to have a foreign policy that can walk and chew gum at the same time. The events of the past week are a good sign that Obama is not the reincarnation of Carter.