The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.
Torture is
…show more content…
At the same time, he must subject himself to the consequences of an illegal act." The comparison between civil disobedience and torture is similar to the viewpoint that torture is necessary in order to save a country.
There are some that do not constitute the United States ' treatment of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo as torture because there were different definitions of the word. According to the Third Geneva Convention, torture is defined as "acts of violence" and "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted." After the September 11, 2001 attack, the United States changed its definition of torture to "physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death." To be regarded as torture, the act "must cause some lasting, though not necessarily permanent damage." Some disregard these acts as simply cruel treatment and do
Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case
While the law itself condemns use of torture for any purpose, torture becomes necessary to be used in particular critical instances. According to Miles, the United States senate allowed the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on a number of cases and detainees. The human rights should be considered first in any event whether in interrogation or any other course of action1. The policy makers have found themselves between hard and difficult decisions to make on the techniques for obtaining vital information from terrorists who are trained heavily on resisting from giving information when caught in the wrong side of the law.
Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.
Torture is commonly practiced all over the world, but most notably in the Guantánamo bay detention center in Cuba. It is most commonly used on prisoners of war to obtain useful enemy information, but it is not limited to that as it is practiced in normal prisons and jails. After experiencing torture, people don’t possess the same mindset. These (cruel ) sessions of
Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are
Torture is the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or to force them to do or say something, or for the pleasure of the person inflicting the pain. The Central Intelligence Agency of the US is known for its torture methods, or “enhanced interrogation techniques.” These various torture methods have led to a lot of backlash from the public and added resistance from the opposing organizations. Legally, Torture, done by Americans, has been banned under various acts. However, with a new, pro-torture administration in The White House, reinstatement of torture may take place. By observing and analyzing the groups that will be affected, Reinstatement of torture will be a detrimental decision that will negatively affect
Torture, being defined by the 1984 Convention Against Torture is the “cruel, inhumane, or degrading infliction of severe pain or suffering, physical or mental, on a prisoner to obtain information or a confession, or to mete out a punishment for a suspected crime” (Beehner), is condemned and considered illegal by the United States of America and carries severe punishment for those that carry out the act. Yet the numerous amounts of maltreatment of the detainees held by the US during the War on Terror has led to humanitarian interference and, more notably, concern from the United Nations assembly. The most prominent facility in which these detainees are being held is the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp, a site used for indefinite detention (mostly without trial), yet other secret prisons (operated by the CIA) are scattered about the world, which are also used for “enhanced” interrogation purposes.
There is an ongoing debate on whether torture should be used and if it is ever “ok”. There are many different points of view and both sides have very clear, convincing arguments on whether torture should be used as a way to obtain information. One side says that torture is not necessary even in extreme cases. The other side it should be used if it mandatory. Although these sound like a compromise they do have a few conflicting ideas. Even though both essays are trying to sway the reader to one side or another, it is the reader’s choice on how he or she feels on torture.
Torture is the infliction of severe pain and/or mental suffering for deterrence, for punishment, or sadistic pleasure, or to induce someone to divulge important information (Lee, 2006). Now let’s us look at the term water boarding and what it mean. It was reported the CIA had been using "a technique known as 'water boarding,' in which a prisoner is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe he might drown (Macdonald, 2008). Personally I believe it is a form of torture and enhanced interrogation. The person is already captured by authorities with no means to do additional harm. I’m sure there are others techniques the government has to gain the information needed from terrorists. I believe terrorists should be punished
Most people in a civilized nation disagree with torture. However, in compelling and threatening circumstances it may be allowed. Here is the reason, Many terrorist organizations take advantage of the situation and make an entryway for an assault. Without the usage of torture, it would take extra time and open doors for another strike later on. Through the use of torture, the CIA gained useful data by interrogating two terrorist group leaders, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, both of them gave significant data, after agents used torture. (Gordon n.p.) Zubaydah showed the way to Khalid Mohammed, who was found to be the mastermind behind 9-11 attacks. (Gordon n.p.) The usage of torture helped gain useful information about terrorist organizations accountable for the assaults and it opened a way to stop possible assaults driven by Al-Qaida later on. (In -Debate n.p.) Present and former U.S. authorities have claimed they found key data
When it comes to the topic of torture, most of us will readily agree that it is a debatable topic. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of the effectiveness of using torture to extract information. Whereas some are convinced torture is an effective way to gain information about a potential terrorist attack, others maintain that torture ultimately leads to false information. Though I concede that using torture may not always gain accurate information, I still insist that using torture is beneficial because when just one person tells us crucial information, the military could be saving for lives than without that information. Time could also be considered a great importance of using torture.
Mistreatment of people creates resentment and anger in the individual and his family, friends and community, and therefore any government-sanctioned torture here is certain to generate more hateful opponents of the US. The official use of torture by the President or another governing body in the U.S. (as given as a replacement on the instruction sheet for this paper) would nullify US efforts against torture abroad and undermine U.S. human rights policy. It also would signal to other governments that when faced with a special situation, any behavior is acceptable. It has been proven by organizations such as Human Rights Watch, United States Institute of Peace and The Crimes of War Project that legitimizing torture, even on a small scale, or any form of cruel treatment brings the principles and ethics that society is based on down. Especially if the U.S. uses it because to the rest of the world we are looked up to as the most law-biding nation, yet we bend the rules to fit each circumstance and look for the loop holes which brings further scrutiny on specific things such as; a POW not being a terrorist detainee and are somehow outside the realm of human rights laws against torture. Not only can torture be unproductive it can also work totally against a nation that uses it. For instance if the U.S. didn’t enforce the universally recognized right to not be tortured it
This paper uses 6 articles, 3 scholarly and 3 non scholarly articles to discuss when is torture necessary despite conflicting with peoples’ moralities. This paper is to compare and contrast the two different types of articles and see how both can benefit a paper as long as the author can distinguish what information is useful and credible information. It will, also, discuss what makes some people see torture as a necessity as opposed to those who view torture as wrong. In addition, the paper will discuss what social factors and events make some individuals break their moral codes and feel that they have no choice but to violate basic human rights and see torture as the only means to an end.
A swarm of terror arose when news of torture at Abu Ghraib, a U.S military prison, was revealed. The chilling images reveal soldiers “taunting naked Iraqi prisoners who are forced to assume humiliating poses” (Hersh). People did not know how to react and were taking sides; whether the matter was an unethical issue or if it was just a harmless way for soldiers to blow off some steam. Torture of prisoners is a debatable problem that needs solving. The act is justified by being called “enhanced interrogation” (Bloche 1330). Some think the problem is insignificant because they believe that torture is part of the prisoner’s punishment. However, torture is a dehumanizing act. Not only is torture of prisoners illegal, it is unfair and mentally and physically distressing.
Imagine awaking in the morning, going downstairs and preparing the morning meal. While enjoying the sunshine through the kitchen window along with a chai tea latte, the news on the television suddenly changes from the mundane to chaotic confusion. Disaster has struck! The implausible has just happened and the nation is in chaos. This disaster could happen at any moment and at any point across the globe. If the only method of prevention to this traumatic event is by the skilled technique of information extraction known as torture, would it not be the government’s obligation to the people to ensure this method of prevention was exercised? When considering the threat from extremists, the United States government must allow for the use of