cl._m      "There are situations in which torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory [to save lives]."    

gr_m1  / cl_1a       torture is justified in example 1 (the A-bomber).

   gr_1a   millions would die.

               w_1a   the lives of millions are more important than the "rights" of one criminal.

gr_m2 /  cl_2b       torture is justified in examples 2 (jumbo jet) and 3 (mothers).

   gr_2b   only difference from example 1 is the numbers involved are smaller.

   w_2b   "we should balance the innocent lives against the means needed to save them."  [ OR comparison warrant ]

w._m /  w_1a and w_2b      =  the needs of the many outweigh the "rights" of the few [deduction/value].  OR

 [ example warrant - These are representative, relevant examples.]

q.  [ "There are situations "]  i.e. in some cases.

r.  torture should not be used for punishment or to gain confessions (and only if the torture subject is known to hold lives in his hands).

b.   b_1a            [The reader's feelings in response to example 1]       OR

utilitarian ethics - The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

b_2b       the mothers poll which supports the w. that the good of the young outweighs the good of the criminal.

b_m1      "... if the individual is all that important ... it is correspondingly important to protect the rights of [many] individuals threatened by terrorists."

b_m2      "... precedents are assassination and preemptive attack." *

• Depending on how you look at the article you could consider b_m2 another ground for the main claim.