What do you think of the use of torture? How would you define torture? Do you think waterboarding should be considered torture? Do you think torture is effective?
Torture is something that I don't think any person should have to go through. I would define torture as any act on another person meant to manipulate them using mental or physical harm. Therefore I definitely would consider waterboarding torture. Waterboarding simulates drowning and can lead to death or respiratory problems. However, while torture is a harsh way to deal with problems it has proven effective. Is it worth harming one person, often times this person being a terrorist, to save hundreds or thousands of lives. I think yes. So overall I think I'm torn on the use of torture because while it is effective, it is a terrible thing to do. Love Dan!
I think torture is a good way to force a person to listen to you but it is also very dangerous. Torture is a method by means of physical or mental harm to let a person know that you are not messing around with them and that you will do anything to get your answers. I think waterboarding should be considered torture because it is simulating drowning and to me drowning is a big fear. Torture is very effective because it shows a person that the torturer is going to do everything in their power to get what they want and it works. In Zero Dark Thirty, an American CIA agent holds an Al-Queda member captive and forces answers out of him by waterboarding and humiliating him and they eventally work. I think torture is bad but it is very effective in the end. Love Joe
I personally don't agree with torture, but i don't really disagree with it at the same time. I think if it was done for the right cause there could be a justifiable reason for it. I would define torture as any mental and physical harm done to someone to obtain something from them. That being said i would consider water boarding as torture because it meets these requirements. It is used to gain information on people and it simulates drowning which falls under both mental and physical damage. I definitely think it is effective but i feel as though most people just kinda sweep this problem under the rug.
I would define torture as physically or mentally traumatizing someone to the point of giving into the demands of the torturer. Waterboarding, for example, seems to be one of the more effective, damaging forms of torture. Ethically speaking, it's a pretty mixed bag. Some seem to find it just, some think its alright when used in necessary situations, and others are strictly against it. In my view, it is completely depends on the situation. If it is necessary to torture to gain the information to save the lives of thousands, then that is more than proper. If a high tiered target knows (or can safely be assumed to know) future plots to destroy innocent lives, then it is fair. However, morally speaking, I feel that torture should stop at that. Unless the information is imminent and necessary or if a high value targets knows of future plots, torture should not be used. It should be saved as a last resort. This, in turn, will maintain the effectiveness of torture. If it is used often, it will be viewed as less of a threat, and most of those being tortured will simply start giving false information and misleads.
Torture isn't something that should be tolerated whatsoever. To me torture would be defined as any action that causes the victim to suffer until the desired effect are achieved. This is no way to get what you want. As a mother would tell her child violence is never the answer. So i guess that rule doesn't apply to the adults of the world then. Even though torture is effective it still is a very dangerous thing to put someone through, even if the desired effect is achieved it doesn't excuse the fact that you just put someone's life in danger to do so. Water boarding it one of the worst kinds of torture in my opinion because it gives you a sense of drowning. It makes you believe you are dying by suffocation which is slow and painful. On top of that it can be the cause of respiratory problems. Now being a person who suffers from asthma I can personally say that is not a fun feeling. Having to watch what you do, what environments you're in, and having to take medication or die are constantly a worry, so yes water boarding is a type of torture, and not one that can be healed in some cases but that pain could be with them the rest of their lives. No matter who it's not ok to torture even if it is effective. As I have heard it said, imagine yourself in their shoes, would you still feel like torture is the right thing to do?
Like many people, I have mixed views on torture. I define torture as any act specifically designed not to kill somebody, but "encourage" them to do something using physical or mental harm. Different types of torture can be handled very differently. A lot of people can't bear the thought of being physically tortured (like the kind in Rambo). The physical pain and suffering would be awful. On the other hand, somebody whose deathly afraid of cellophane or claustrophobic would likely rather the physical pain, instead of the torture forms based off fears. This is a selfish thought for America, but we have to keep our image clean. That means physical harm torturing simply can't be allowed or else the same tactic will be used against us even more often. Something like water boarding is the most "humane" form of torture, if torture can even be considered humane. That said, it really should only be used in the most dire of circumstances. Meaning national security is being directly threatened and we have the main assistant to the leader of ____ terrorist group. What I mean by that is we can't be water boarding a man who we think may have some info. It has to be an absolute sure thing that must be done.
I define torture as any amount of great pain dealt to any person, with the purpose of gaining something. This maybe information, as is common, or a desired result that otherwise couldn't be obtained without these pains being dealt. I honestly despise the idea of torture. I know that it can be crucial in emergency situations, yet the idea of putting someone putting me through my greatest fears is too much. Perhaps I am too sympathetic and shouldn't have a good say on the use of torture. Waterboarding, by my definition, would most definitely be a torture. It may not leave permanent injuries like other tortures but it still does damage, much like exploiting one's claustrophobia. I do not see torture as an effective way to harness information. It isn't humane, and there need to be other ways of dealing with this lack of intelligence. It seems we haven't had any trouble establishing our presence in the world, so having greater surveillance clearly wouldn't be a problem. Plenty of terrible acts happen that we can't stop in time. I myself do not hear of many instances were a victim was tortured, information was released, and the day was saved. If this happened often and on a scale that was important enough to hear on the news perhaps it would be convincing. The case being I hardly hear of these instances I think torture is unnecessary.
I think torture should be talked about on the same level as war. They are not very diffrent when you think about it. I think of torture as any act that physically or mentally harms a person to an extreme extent that they cannot take it anymore. From what we have learned, waterboarding would fall under the category of torture because it does exactly this. I dont think anyone will agree that torture is morally right to do, but that doesnt mean it isnt necessary. It is definitely effective as we all read about all the information we have gotten from torturing people in prison. We go to war and kill thousands of people for what is believed to be "the best interest for our country" and that is exactly what is happening when we torture inmates. Im not saying its right but neither is war. The leaders of our country still have to do what they have to do to protect their country and that if that includes torturing then thats what they will do. With this being said i think the government needs to be sure that it is really in the countries' best interest and not just in their best interest so that it only happens when it really needs to.
Torture is an unclear and difficult subject for many people, myself included. I define torture as inflicting physical or mental trauma to a person against their will in order to get them to reveal information. By this description, water-boarding is definitely torture. The author of the article explained that he thought if torture would reveal information to save lives, it is our "duty" to do anything and everything to obtain the necessary information. The author also stated that with this, the question is not whether or not to use torture, but when. While I don't feel it is as simple as the author makes it out to be, I do agree with him at times. Like the author, I think that regular citizens and prisoners of war that belong to a nation's army, should never be subjected to terrorism. When it comes to terrorists who have committed heinous acts and are innocent civilians are endangered, I think that terrorism may be viable to use as an option. I do think there is a time and place for torture, but it needs to be a weapon, much like nuclear weapons, that is used as a last possible resort. I think that the prisoners should be given a chance to reveal information on their own, and should be warned about the severe consequences, and exactly what will happen to them if they still decide to remain silent. I also believe that officials should start with the mildest forms of torture, and that they should use discretion to make sure no permanent damage is done, and to stop before killing the prisoner. I think that torture can be effective, or else there should be no reason to engage in it. I think that torture is an extremely dangerous tool that should be handled sparingly as well as responsibly. -McKenzie
This is a very well thought out post and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. Although this torture does exist and it is carried out by many American soliders I do not believe it is as simple as the author of this toruture essay makes it out to be. I like your idea of military personnel not being torutured no matter what country they are from but if they are terrorists planning on inflicting danger on our country then that should give us the right to torchure.
Some things I don't particularly argree with you on are giving them the chance to confess their knowlage on certain subjects for large amounts of time. Most prisoners are given the chance to talk and are warned from the beginning of the interrogation of the consequences to come. Usually when they choose not to talk they are not going to change their mind and have already been given the chance to.
Overall, your post is interesting to read and your ideas are very intelligent.
For the most part, I agree with the author of the article about what torture entails ("cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment of a detainee), and about when torture is appropriate. I think the only time torture should be used is in the case of "a terrorist with information." I think torturing a hard criminal in order to obtain intelligence that could many save lives is a moral duty. However, the agents who order the torture and carry it out must be professionally trained to determine if the terrorist does have crucial information and to make sure the torture is performed "safely." I also believe that the United States is the moral compass for the rest of the world so making the torture public could be dangerous. I think the US government should use torture when absolutely necessary, but should keep it a private matter. I have faith in the government agencies to use torture at the right times and in the right ways. I do think waterboarding is torture because it makes the victim feel like they are drowning. I think such forms of torture are often effective because they have extreme psychological effects. Even the worst criminal could crack when he has lost his spirit and will, and knows that his life is determined by simply answering a question.
I would define torture as any act inflicting pain on another for punishment or for the purpose of gaining something. This pain could be emotional or physical. As waterboarding would clearly be considered a form of torture, I personally find it much less torturous than other methods. While waterboarding gives someone the effect that they are drowning (which is cruel), they are not actually drowning nor facing any real physical harm and are able to regain their breath in a few minutes. I would consider this emotional trauma, and while it is still torture, I find it very effective because the person is not really being harmed to a point of no return. In all, I do think torture is effective when protecting national security, yet should only be done within the guidelines Krauthammer pointed out in his essay (that is you can only use torture in the ticking time bomb and slower-fuse high-level terrorist situations). -Jess Voight
At the beginning of this article, I thought the author was crazy for trying to defend something as inhumane as torturing another person. Torture can be described as a person intentionally applying physical or mental harm on another person. I first thought that this is unacceptable no matter what the circumstance. But the author did an okay job at showing how it could be put to somewhat good use. Although I despise the idea of purposefully harming another person, I agree that at certain times it could possibly be acceptable. This would be acceptable when other people's lives are at risk and torture is the quickest and most efficient way of getting the truth and information out of someone. But there must be limits when this is happening, such as stopping immediately after getting the information they need and never dragging the process out longer than necessary. Waterboarding is most definitely a form of torture. Although this is proven to be useful, torture should be used as little as possible.
“Watch your thoughts, for they become words. Watch your words, for they become actions. Watch your actions, for they become habits. Watch your habits, for they become character” –Unknown. Although torture has been proven countless times to be affective in getting useful information, I believe that NO person should be tortured. Is that how you should treat people? Harming any human no matter how good or bad they are is inhuman. The definition of torture is an act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty. I understand that torture has been used on terrorists to get information and as a result has saved thousands of lives yet how could you define them as bad people for harming others while you are doing the exact same thing to them? Actions from both the terrorists and interrogators are inhuman. Frankly, I think that people whose job it is to torture prisoners for a confession is hypocritical. You are contradicting yourself when you imprison a criminal for harming/killing others and then you physically and mentally harm them to get information for your benefit. Do I believe that criminals should be punished to the degree of their actions? Yes. Do I believe that gaining useful information from terrorists to be able to save lives is a good thing? Yes. I do not believe that torture is the right way to go about this. With that said I consider waterboarding a form of torture. The act of waterboarding is to make the victim feel the sensation of drowning and often this act of torture leads to forms of repertory problems and even death. I acknowledge that torture is effective in terms of gaining important information but I do not believe that these actions are morally just. When you gain information by torturing a human being you also are losing your sense of character and morality. When you torture a criminal you are only stooping down to their level. You lose so much just to get what you want whether it’s for a confession, punishment or as a cruel act of revenge. Actions speak louder than words.
First off, I am absolutely against torture. That being said, I define torture as any act that purposefully inflicts pain or emotional distress on another living creature, whether it is another human being or an animal. I think it is absolutely wrong to use torture as a tool to get someone to talk about a crime or to confess to committing a crime. Although we usually use torture on people we believe to be terrorists or accessories to terrorism, I believe that by torturing those people to get them to talk, we are lowering ourselves to their level, rather than being the "bigger person" in the situation. Sure, torturing someone will probably cause them to give us the information we desire, but that does not rule the act of torture as morally "okay." Now, the act of water boarding is, in my opinion, torture. While it may not inflict physical pain, it does cause emotional distress to the victim. The sensation of drowning would cause anyone to become terrified and give up the information they have so the torture will finally stop. However, I do think torture is effective in obtaining the information investigators desire, but it is a horrible method of doing so. In the case of either using torture and preventing a terrorist act or not using torture and allowing the act of terrorism to occur, is a very difficult situation to decide what is right. -Heather S
Torture is a very difficult thing to talk about as it seems to be very cruel and I humans, but at the same time does have the potential to do lots of good and save many lives. I define torture as the intentional harm of another human in order to gain information or an advantage over them. I think that torture is generally a negative thing and that whenever possible needs to be avoided, and in most cases it can be as there are other methods of obtaining information rather than torture. I do consider water boarding as a form of torture as it mentally damages s person, however I don't find it quite as bad as other forms which could be more physically damaging, although in no means do I think it's a good thing. The subject of torture is a very difficult thing and I believe that it must be avoided whenever possible, but in extreme cases may prove to be a necessity.
Torture is the physical or mental manipulation of people as punishment or to get something such as information out of them. I think torture is a very powerful tool at our disposal and it would be foolish not to use it. It would be like not using Google because they don't obtain their information legally or they break copyright. No one would stop using Google just as no one should stop using torture. I do believe there needs to be standards and procedures to be up held. You can't just go around torturing anyone. I think more humane methods of torture should be utilized first before resorting to more extreme methods such as waterboarding. I personally would not want to be water boarded, it doesn't seem very nice. However, if you are a terrorist or someone targeting innocent people as defined in the essay, you need to be aware of the risk and the consequences that go with it. I do think torture should be restricted for strictly informational purposes not for punishment. Unlike most people who have responded, I do not see physical damage and torture as the more inhumane kind. I think mental torture is far more damaging. There is no scar tissue or anything to cover a mental wound. It is much more difficult to recover from mental trauma than physical pain. Torture is something people just need to get use to because with its effectiveness, it will not be eradicated anytime soon.
I believe that torture, while morally unjust, can be a necessary method of collecting information in certain limited scenarios. Torture can be defined as the use of pain for the gain of information. This concept is incredibly immoral because the whole idea of torture is to push the person being tortured to the point where he is mentally forced to submit because he feels that his life is in danger. With this definition, yes, waterboarding is a very strong example of torture. The person is made to feel as though he is drowning and water is filling his lungs. I do think that torture is effective, because it has been used effectively to gather important information. Despite the fact that it is immoral, I believe that if it is being used to gather information from a definitive source that will very likely save hundreds of lives, torture is acceptable.
I think that the use of torture can be acceptable depending on the situation that is associated with it. Obviously I don't think torture for pure enjoyment should be allowed. But if the person in question had information that I needed to know for the safety for others, I would make an exception. I would define torture as the application of physical pain or mental trauma in order to control the person in question. I don't think that there should be any question of whether water boarding is torture or not. It is absolutely torture and a very intense example at that. It simulates the effect of drowning to someone who can't control it. I personally can't imagine being subjected to that. To even have the thought or feeling that I'm going to die as being forced by someone else is just a scary thought. In saying this I also think torture can be very effective as I couldn't comprehend how someone could make it through being subjected to so many different types of traumatic situations. The person in question is likely doing something to jeopardize the lives of others, and I don't think it's worth it to treat that person nicely rather than saving the lives of thousands of innocent people.
I understand I'll probably get a lot of flack for my opinion on this subject but I side with torture. I think that waterboarding is a form of torture, and torture is a cruel or degrading act done on someone. I believe when used to gather information or in times of warfare this is an acceptable and effect method. People who get tortured for information are not tortured just because they walked down the wrong street at night, normally they have information to give. Anyone who is given top secret information is also normally given training to protect themselves and that information. This is why torture happens, in order to get that information out. It requires breaking that training. While yes, I'm sure there are cases where the person being tortured lacked information or was a civilian and not trained, but most of the time they are not. I believe torture is ok when used on enemies with information because like American in war who have information they are trained to combat this. The 'right' thing cannot always be done in order to protect the American citizens. Torture to me is like a don't ask don't tell policy. Until the more cases come out involving torture and more and more civilians become morally involved it should be left alone.
I do not think torture is a good thing, actually I think it would be a very scary thought to get tortured. I would define torture as someone who brings severe pain or anguish to someone in order to get information out of them. Yes I do think waterboarding should be considered torture because it is a form of interrogation where water is repeatedly poured on you so you can't breath, which then brings pain to that person. In some ways i do think that torture is effective, because if you have a terrorist I would support torturing him as long as we get information out of him. On the other hand i don't think torture would be effective if the terrorist was killed during torture.
As far as the moral side of torture, this issue is huge. I would define totrture as the willing cause of physical or mental harm in order to gain information from someone. So, yes, waterboarding is an EFFECTIVE form of torture. But it isn't right. It is definitely torture by any definition. I can't see anything not harming by forcing someone to lie on a board and have water poured over their face before being smothered by plastic. As far as getting information, I see nothing right about forcing information out of someone. Whether there are thousands of lives at stake or not, there is no reason for torture. There's a reason it's banned by the treaty put in place a the Geneva Convention. Therefore, Torture cannot be considered an effective way of getting information, either morally, or legally.
I think torture should not be used but should be used at the same time because the results of torture can be beneficial. Torture itself is inhumane, not right, and seems barbaric. But if you are torturing a criminal for information it can help a lot and potentially save lives. In the reading it said that they give people withholding information a drug that makes them tell the truth. I believe if torture was to be done to get answers this would be the most humane and less violent way to do so. I consider water boarding a form of torture because the feeling is similar to that of drowning. This could potentially and severely hurt someone; potentially kill someone. There are other ways to get information from a criminal and I believe torturing someone with water should not be done.
By definition, torture is “The action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something”. That being said, I see it as a practice that does much more than physically harm a person. People who are tortured emotionally and psychologically scarred for life. I understand that people who are tortured are often terrorists, but I feel that the operation is just too sketchy. It’s sort of a black market kind of deal, everyone knows it’s there but no one on the outside is sure of what actually happens. We can read all we want about the topic, but how do we know it’s true? This wouldn’t be the first time the government didn’t give the whole truth. All of that aside, I do thing waterboarding is torture, how could you classify it otherwise? Enrichment? Stimulation? And I think it is effective, it gets the job done. Then again, so is murder.
I believe torture is a necessary tactic in todays world but is also an inhumane way of getting information. Yes it has proven useful but also has left some life altering complications, like John McCain for example. But the US is not the only country that uses torture techniques. One can make the argument that any group that kidnaps people and holds them as hostages are torturing those people. Its not like the hostages are at a 5 star hotel with a buffet and comfy bed. Torture is used when people will not comply with their demands. Torture can be physical or mental. So whether it is water boarding or depriving someone of food, they are esstentially being tortured, but the degree is different. If you are trying to break someone for information, like terrorists, then you go to extreme measures like water boarding. While torture is inhumane there simply is no way around it. You could inject someone with a "truth vaccine" to make them talk, but that is also torture. No matter how you look at it, torture is apart of the world we live in. -Shivaram
Torture in my opinion is when you inflict pain onto the ones you maliciously want to hurt to whether to gather information or to be just plain demonic. Water boarding is an example of torture. The feeling that your drowning is a physical and emotional pain that your enduring on someone. If you can die from this, then its torture at its finest. I don't agree with the use of torture from a personal stand point, but from a political one, I believe that its use is necessary. The use of torture to find out information is effective and thus information has been proven to help the U.S. find and kill Osama Bin Laden. Yet, torture can also be abused, and can be inflicted on any prisoner that poses a threat to national security in the sake of preservation.
I don't really believe in torturing. I know people think it's effective in getting information out of people such as terrorists, or potential threats to our country, but I disagree with it. To me, torture is hurting someone physically or mentally to force them to either do something or say something. In this case, waterboarding is definitely torture and I'm glad we aren't allowed to use it anymore. Many argue that torture is effective, and obviously it is because of course if you're hurting someone enough they're going to agree to do something/ spew information. That's not the right way to go about it, though in my opinion. I feel that once you make a person comfortable enough to talk, they will. That and torture is not always so effective because the person being tortured could just get peeved and decide not to tell you anything. I just don't think torture is necessary, it's cruel and unusual punishment.
I would define torture as a tactic used by one to get information out of another, using harm. I think that water boarding is a great way to torture people. The feeling of drowning and suffocating is something tht someone can't ignore. One's body will automatically fight it. I think that torture in itself is useful and I think that it should not be frowned upon. The person being tortured usually isn't good anyways and it helps people in the long run. One can obviously see that torture is cruel, but it is helpful. The information that was gathered from torture helped lead to the assassination of Bin Laden. People should not be so worried about torture. It is the government simply doing its job to protect its people.
I would define torture as any act that causes intentional harm, physical or mental, to a person (including water boarding). Initially, I thought that the use of torture was necessary and felt that “All’s fair in love and war”. When I thought about it further though, I began to question it immensely. There is simply too much grey area that makes torture a scary thought for me. For example, whose job would it be to decide if the person in question knew “important” enough information to be tortured? Who would do the torturing? Who would be allowed to be tortured? Only terrorists? If so, then racial profiling will become an even bigger issue. I do not think that this tactic is effective either. If the government was ripping off my fingernails I might give false information so that they would stop. Furthermore, I believe that allowing our government the use of torture is giving the people in control way too much power. Once they are openly allowed the right to physically harm human beings just because they may have “important” information that the government would like to have, our rights are being diminished…once again. I don’t trust them enough to give them that type of power and physical control over me and my body. In addition, it's human nature to "take a mile" when you are "given an inch". For example, when the speed limit's 50, we go 60. If they changed the speed limit to 6, would we go that speed? No. We would go 70. We naturally push the envelope on every rule put in place to control us. Imagine what would happen if the U.S. allowed the use of torture.
I personally do not think that anybody should have to go through torture at any time in their life. As many people have already said, torture is an act that is going to harm somebody intentionally. I think that physcially abusing somebody until they "talk" is not the right or humane way to go about things. That is why I absolutely think that waterboarding is an example of torture. Is it effective? Unfortunately yes it is. In a lot of cases people will give in and eventually release the information that is wanted. The thought of torture is very scary to me, and I feel it should be done away with.
Torture is a sore topic. It seems to be an effective way of gaining information especially in the case of Osama Bin Laden. But this does not make it right. Just because the USA has gotten information by brutally beating someone or mentally abusing them does not make it the only source of gaining information. Aren't we a nation that protects people's rights? America is the land of the free so why are we holding people who haven't been charged with a crime in Guantanamo Bay. There are other ways to combat terrorism and gain information. Incentives have been proven to work extremely well especially in the police force when a criminal is given a plea bargain where they are given a shorter sentence or no sentence in exchange for information about other criminals. We should implement a system that doesn't involve extreme abuse for information because torture is just plain inhumane.
Torture is something that I don't think any person should have to go through. I would define torture as any act on another person meant to manipulate them using mental or physical harm. Therefore I definitely would consider waterboarding torture. Waterboarding simulates drowning and can lead to death or respiratory problems. However, while torture is a harsh way to deal with problems it has proven effective. Is it worth harming one person, often times this person being a terrorist, to save hundreds or thousands of lives. I think yes. So overall I think I'm torn on the use of torture because while it is effective, it is a terrible thing to do. Love Dan!
ReplyDeleteI think torture is a good way to force a person to listen to you but it is also very dangerous. Torture is a method by means of physical or mental harm to let a person know that you are not messing around with them and that you will do anything to get your answers. I think waterboarding should be considered torture because it is simulating drowning and to me drowning is a big fear. Torture is very effective because it shows a person that the torturer is going to do everything in their power to get what they want and it works. In Zero Dark Thirty, an American CIA agent holds an Al-Queda member captive and forces answers out of him by waterboarding and humiliating him and they eventally work. I think torture is bad but it is very effective in the end. Love Joe
ReplyDeleteI personally don't agree with torture, but i don't really disagree with it at the same time. I think if it was done for the right cause there could be a justifiable reason for it. I would define torture as any mental and physical harm done to someone to obtain something from them. That being said i would consider water boarding as torture because it meets these requirements. It is used to gain information on people and it simulates drowning which falls under both mental and physical damage. I definitely think it is effective but i feel as though most people just kinda sweep this problem under the rug.
ReplyDeleteI would define torture as physically or mentally traumatizing someone to the point of giving into the demands of the torturer. Waterboarding, for example, seems to be one of the more effective, damaging forms of torture. Ethically speaking, it's a pretty mixed bag. Some seem to find it just, some think its alright when used in necessary situations, and others are strictly against it. In my view, it is completely depends on the situation. If it is necessary to torture to gain the information to save the lives of thousands, then that is more than proper. If a high tiered target knows (or can safely be assumed to know) future plots to destroy innocent lives, then it is fair. However, morally speaking, I feel that torture should stop at that. Unless the information is imminent and necessary or if a high value targets knows of future plots, torture should not be used. It should be saved as a last resort. This, in turn, will maintain the effectiveness of torture. If it is used often, it will be viewed as less of a threat, and most of those being tortured will simply start giving false information and misleads.
ReplyDeleteClark
Torture isn't something that should be tolerated whatsoever. To me torture would be defined as any action that causes the victim to suffer until the desired effect are achieved. This is no way to get what you want. As a mother would tell her child violence is never the answer. So i guess that rule doesn't apply to the adults of the world then. Even though torture is effective it still is a very dangerous thing to put someone through, even if the desired effect is achieved it doesn't excuse the fact that you just put someone's life in danger to do so. Water boarding it one of the worst kinds of torture in my opinion because it gives you a sense of drowning. It makes you believe you are dying by suffocation which is slow and painful. On top of that it can be the cause of respiratory problems. Now being a person who suffers from asthma I can personally say that is not a fun feeling. Having to watch what you do, what environments you're in, and having to take medication or die are constantly a worry, so yes water boarding is a type of torture, and not one that can be healed in some cases but that pain could be with them the rest of their lives. No matter who it's not ok to torture even if it is effective. As I have heard it said, imagine yourself in their shoes, would you still feel like torture is the right thing to do?
ReplyDeleteLike many people, I have mixed views on torture. I define torture as any act specifically designed not to kill somebody, but "encourage" them to do something using physical or mental harm. Different types of torture can be handled very differently. A lot of people can't bear the thought of being physically tortured (like the kind in Rambo). The physical pain and suffering would be awful. On the other hand, somebody whose deathly afraid of cellophane or claustrophobic would likely rather the physical pain, instead of the torture forms based off fears.
ReplyDeleteThis is a selfish thought for America, but we have to keep our image clean. That means physical harm torturing simply can't be allowed or else the same tactic will be used against us even more often. Something like water boarding is the most "humane" form of torture, if torture can even be considered humane.
That said, it really should only be used in the most dire of circumstances. Meaning national security is being directly threatened and we have the main assistant to the leader of ____ terrorist group. What I mean by that is we can't be water boarding a man who we think may have some info. It has to be an absolute sure thing that must be done.
I define torture as any amount of great pain dealt to any person, with the purpose of gaining something. This maybe information, as is common, or a desired result that otherwise couldn't be obtained without these pains being dealt. I honestly despise the idea of torture. I know that it can be crucial in emergency situations, yet the idea of putting someone putting me through my greatest fears is too much. Perhaps I am too sympathetic and shouldn't have a good say on the use of torture. Waterboarding, by my definition, would most definitely be a torture. It may not leave permanent injuries like other tortures but it still does damage, much like exploiting one's claustrophobia.
ReplyDeleteI do not see torture as an effective way to harness information. It isn't humane, and there need to be other ways of dealing with this lack of intelligence. It seems we haven't had any trouble establishing our presence in the world, so having greater surveillance clearly wouldn't be a problem. Plenty of terrible acts happen that we can't stop in time. I myself do not hear of many instances were a victim was tortured, information was released, and the day was saved. If this happened often and on a scale that was important enough to hear on the news perhaps it would be convincing. The case being I hardly hear of these instances I think torture is unnecessary.
I think torture should be talked about on the same level as war. They are not very diffrent when you think about it. I think of torture as any act that physically or mentally harms a person to an extreme extent that they cannot take it anymore. From what we have learned, waterboarding would fall under the category of torture because it does exactly this. I dont think anyone will agree that torture is morally right to do, but that doesnt mean it isnt necessary. It is definitely effective as we all read about all the information we have gotten from torturing people in prison. We go to war and kill thousands of people for what is believed to be "the best interest for our country" and that is exactly what is happening when we torture inmates. Im not saying its right but neither is war. The leaders of our country still have to do what they have to do to protect their country and that if that includes torturing then thats what they will do. With this being said i think the government needs to be sure that it is really in the countries' best interest and not just in their best interest so that it only happens when it really needs to.
ReplyDeleteTorture is an unclear and difficult subject for many people, myself included. I define torture as inflicting physical or mental trauma to a person against their will in order to get them to reveal information. By this description, water-boarding is definitely torture. The author of the article explained that he thought if torture would reveal information to save lives, it is our "duty" to do anything and everything to obtain the necessary information. The author also stated that with this, the question is not whether or not to use torture, but when. While I don't feel it is as simple as the author makes it out to be, I do agree with him at times. Like the author, I think that regular citizens and prisoners of war that belong to a nation's army, should never be subjected to terrorism. When it comes to terrorists who have committed heinous acts and are innocent civilians are endangered, I think that terrorism may be viable to use as an option. I do think there is a time and place for torture, but it needs to be a weapon, much like nuclear weapons, that is used as a last possible resort. I think that the prisoners should be given a chance to reveal information on their own, and should be warned about the severe consequences, and exactly what will happen to them if they still decide to remain silent. I also believe that officials should start with the mildest forms of torture, and that they should use discretion to make sure no permanent damage is done, and to stop before killing the prisoner. I think that torture can be effective, or else there should be no reason to engage in it. I think that torture is an extremely dangerous tool that should be handled sparingly as well as responsibly.
ReplyDelete-McKenzie
Kenz,
DeleteThis is a very well thought out post and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. Although this torture does exist and it is carried out by many American soliders I do not believe it is as simple as the author of this toruture essay makes it out to be. I like your idea of military personnel not being torutured no matter what country they are from but if they are terrorists planning on inflicting danger on our country then that should give us the right to torchure.
Some things I don't particularly argree with you on are giving them the chance to confess their knowlage on certain subjects for large amounts of time. Most prisoners are given the chance to talk and are warned from the beginning of the interrogation of the consequences to come. Usually when they choose not to talk they are not going to change their mind and have already been given the chance to.
Overall, your post is interesting to read and your ideas are very intelligent.
For the most part, I agree with the author of the article about what torture entails ("cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment of a detainee), and about when torture is appropriate. I think the only time torture should be used is in the case of "a terrorist with information." I think torturing a hard criminal in order to obtain intelligence that could many save lives is a moral duty. However, the agents who order the torture and carry it out must be professionally trained to determine if the terrorist does have crucial information and to make sure the torture is performed "safely." I also believe that the United States is the moral compass for the rest of the world so making the torture public could be dangerous. I think the US government should use torture when absolutely necessary, but should keep it a private matter. I have faith in the government agencies to use torture at the right times and in the right ways. I do think waterboarding is torture because it makes the victim feel like they are drowning. I think such forms of torture are often effective because they have extreme psychological effects. Even the worst criminal could crack when he has lost his spirit and will, and knows that his life is determined by simply answering a question.
ReplyDeleteI would define torture as any act inflicting pain on another for punishment or for the purpose of gaining something. This pain could be emotional or physical. As waterboarding would clearly be considered a form of torture, I personally find it much less torturous than other methods. While waterboarding gives someone the effect that they are drowning (which is cruel), they are not actually drowning nor facing any real physical harm and are able to regain their breath in a few minutes. I would consider this emotional trauma, and while it is still torture, I find it very effective because the person is not really being harmed to a point of no return. In all, I do think torture is effective when protecting national security, yet should only be done within the guidelines Krauthammer pointed out in his essay (that is you can only use torture in the ticking time bomb and slower-fuse high-level terrorist situations).
ReplyDelete-Jess Voight
At the beginning of this article, I thought the author was crazy for trying to defend something as inhumane as torturing another person. Torture can be described as a person intentionally applying physical or mental harm on another person. I first thought that this is unacceptable no matter what the circumstance. But the author did an okay job at showing how it could be put to somewhat good use. Although I despise the idea of purposefully harming another person, I agree that at certain times it could possibly be acceptable. This would be acceptable when other people's lives are at risk and torture is the quickest and most efficient way of getting the truth and information out of someone. But there must be limits when this is happening, such as stopping immediately after getting the information they need and never dragging the process out longer than necessary. Waterboarding is most definitely a form of torture. Although this is proven to be useful, torture should be used as little as possible.
ReplyDelete“Watch your thoughts, for they become words. Watch your words, for they become actions. Watch your actions, for they become habits. Watch your habits, for they become character” –Unknown. Although torture has been proven countless times to be affective in getting useful information, I believe that NO person should be tortured. Is that how you should treat people? Harming any human no matter how good or bad they are is inhuman. The definition of torture is an act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty. I understand that torture has been used on terrorists to get information and as a result has saved thousands of lives yet how could you define them as bad people for harming others while you are doing the exact same thing to them? Actions from both the terrorists and interrogators are inhuman. Frankly, I think that people whose job it is to torture prisoners for a confession is hypocritical. You are contradicting yourself when you imprison a criminal for harming/killing others and then you physically and mentally harm them to get information for your benefit. Do I believe that criminals should be punished to the degree of their actions? Yes. Do I believe that gaining useful information from terrorists to be able to save lives is a good thing? Yes. I do not believe that torture is the right way to go about this. With that said I consider waterboarding a form of torture. The act of waterboarding is to make the victim feel the sensation of drowning and often this act of torture leads to forms of repertory problems and even death. I acknowledge that torture is effective in terms of gaining important information but I do not believe that these actions are morally just. When you gain information by torturing a human being you also are losing your sense of character and morality. When you torture a criminal you are only stooping down to their level. You lose so much just to get what you want whether it’s for a confession, punishment or as a cruel act of revenge. Actions speak louder than words.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I am absolutely against torture. That being said, I define torture as any act that purposefully inflicts pain or emotional distress on another living creature, whether it is another human being or an animal. I think it is absolutely wrong to use torture as a tool to get someone to talk about a crime or to confess to committing a crime. Although we usually use torture on people we believe to be terrorists or accessories to terrorism, I believe that by torturing those people to get them to talk, we are lowering ourselves to their level, rather than being the "bigger person" in the situation. Sure, torturing someone will probably cause them to give us the information we desire, but that does not rule the act of torture as morally "okay." Now, the act of water boarding is, in my opinion, torture. While it may not inflict physical pain, it does cause emotional distress to the victim. The sensation of drowning would cause anyone to become terrified and give up the information they have so the torture will finally stop. However, I do think torture is effective in obtaining the information investigators desire, but it is a horrible method of doing so. In the case of either using torture and preventing a terrorist act or not using torture and allowing the act of terrorism to occur, is a very difficult situation to decide what is right.
ReplyDelete-Heather S
Torture is a very difficult thing to talk about as it seems to be very cruel and I humans, but at the same time does have the potential to do lots of good and save many lives. I define torture as the intentional harm of another human in order to gain information or an advantage over them. I think that torture is generally a negative thing and that whenever possible needs to be avoided, and in most cases it can be as there are other methods of obtaining information rather than torture. I do consider water boarding as a form of torture as it mentally damages s person, however I don't find it quite as bad as other forms which could be more physically damaging, although in no means do I think it's a good thing. The subject of torture is a very difficult thing and I believe that it must be avoided whenever possible, but in extreme cases may prove to be a necessity.
ReplyDeleteTorture is the physical or mental manipulation of people as punishment or to get something such as information out of them. I think torture is a very powerful tool at our disposal and it would be foolish not to use it. It would be like not using Google because they don't obtain their information legally or they break copyright. No one would stop using Google just as no one should stop using torture. I do believe there needs to be standards and procedures to be up held. You can't just go around torturing anyone. I think more humane methods of torture should be utilized first before resorting to more extreme methods such as waterboarding. I personally would not want to be water boarded, it doesn't seem very nice. However, if you are a terrorist or someone targeting innocent people as defined in the essay, you need to be aware of the risk and the consequences that go with it. I do think torture should be restricted for strictly informational purposes not for punishment. Unlike most people who have responded, I do not see physical damage and torture as the more inhumane kind. I think mental torture is far more damaging. There is no scar tissue or anything to cover a mental wound. It is much more difficult to recover from mental trauma than physical pain. Torture is something people just need to get use to because with its effectiveness, it will not be eradicated anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteI believe that torture, while morally unjust, can be a necessary method of collecting information in certain limited scenarios. Torture can be defined as the use of pain for the gain of information. This concept is incredibly immoral because the whole idea of torture is to push the person being tortured to the point where he is mentally forced to submit because he feels that his life is in danger. With this definition, yes, waterboarding is a very strong example of torture. The person is made to feel as though he is drowning and water is filling his lungs. I do think that torture is effective, because it has been used effectively to gather important information. Despite the fact that it is immoral, I believe that if it is being used to gather information from a definitive source that will very likely save hundreds of lives, torture is acceptable.
ReplyDeleteI think that the use of torture can be acceptable depending on the situation that is associated with it. Obviously I don't think torture for pure enjoyment should be allowed. But if the person in question had information that I needed to know for the safety for others, I would make an exception. I would define torture as the application of physical pain or mental trauma in order to control the person in question. I don't think that there should be any question of whether water boarding is torture or not. It is absolutely torture and a very intense example at that. It simulates the effect of drowning to someone who can't control it. I personally can't imagine being subjected to that. To even have the thought or feeling that I'm going to die as being forced by someone else is just a scary thought. In saying this I also think torture can be very effective as I couldn't comprehend how someone could make it through being subjected to so many different types of traumatic situations. The person in question is likely doing something to jeopardize the lives of others, and I don't think it's worth it to treat that person nicely rather than saving the lives of thousands of innocent people.
ReplyDeleteI understand I'll probably get a lot of flack for my opinion on this subject but I side with torture. I think that waterboarding is a form of torture, and torture is a cruel or degrading act done on someone. I believe when used to gather information or in times of warfare this is an acceptable and effect method.
ReplyDeletePeople who get tortured for information are not tortured just because they walked down the wrong street at night, normally they have information to give. Anyone who is given top secret information is also normally given training to protect themselves and that information. This is why torture happens, in order to get that information out. It requires breaking that training.
While yes, I'm sure there are cases where the person being tortured lacked information or was a civilian and not trained, but most of the time they are not. I believe torture is ok when used on enemies with information because like American in war who have information they are trained to combat this.
The 'right' thing cannot always be done in order to protect the American citizens. Torture to me is like a don't ask don't tell policy. Until the more cases come out involving torture and more and more civilians become morally involved it should be left alone.
I do not think torture is a good thing, actually I think it would be a very scary thought to get tortured. I would define torture as someone who brings severe pain or anguish to someone in order to get information out of them. Yes I do think waterboarding should be considered torture because it is a form of interrogation where water is repeatedly poured on you so you can't breath, which then brings pain to that person. In some ways i do think that torture is effective, because if you have a terrorist I would support torturing him as long as we get information out of him. On the other hand i don't think torture would be effective if the terrorist was killed during torture.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the moral side of torture, this issue is huge. I would define totrture as the willing cause of physical or mental harm in order to gain information from someone. So, yes, waterboarding is an EFFECTIVE form of torture. But it isn't right. It is definitely torture by any definition. I can't see anything not harming by forcing someone to lie on a board and have water poured over their face before being smothered by plastic. As far as getting information, I see nothing right about forcing information out of someone. Whether there are thousands of lives at stake or not, there is no reason for torture. There's a reason it's banned by the treaty put in place a the Geneva Convention. Therefore, Torture cannot be considered an effective way of getting information, either morally, or legally.
ReplyDeleteI think torture should not be used but should be used at the same time because the results of torture can be beneficial. Torture itself is inhumane, not right, and seems barbaric. But if you are torturing a criminal for information it can help a lot and potentially save lives. In the reading it said that they give people withholding information a drug that makes them tell the truth. I believe if torture was to be done to get answers this would be the most humane and less violent way to do so. I consider water boarding a form of torture because the feeling is similar to that of drowning. This could potentially and severely hurt someone; potentially kill someone. There are other ways to get information from a criminal and I believe torturing someone with water should not be done.
ReplyDeleteBy definition, torture is “The action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something”. That being said, I see it as a practice that does much more than physically harm a person. People who are tortured emotionally and psychologically scarred for life. I understand that people who are tortured are often terrorists, but I feel that the operation is just too sketchy. It’s sort of a black market kind of deal, everyone knows it’s there but no one on the outside is sure of what actually happens. We can read all we want about the topic, but how do we know it’s true? This wouldn’t be the first time the government didn’t give the whole truth. All of that aside, I do thing waterboarding is torture, how could you classify it otherwise? Enrichment? Stimulation? And I think it is effective, it gets the job done. Then again, so is murder.
ReplyDeleteI believe torture is a necessary tactic in todays world but is also an inhumane way of getting information. Yes it has proven useful but also has left some life altering complications, like John McCain for example. But the US is not the only country that uses torture techniques. One can make the argument that any group that kidnaps people and holds them as hostages are torturing those people. Its not like the hostages are at a 5 star hotel with a buffet and comfy bed. Torture is used when people will not comply with their demands. Torture can be physical or mental. So whether it is water boarding or depriving someone of food, they are esstentially being tortured, but the degree is different. If you are trying to break someone for information, like terrorists, then you go to extreme measures like water boarding. While torture is inhumane there simply is no way around it. You could inject someone with a "truth vaccine" to make them talk, but that is also torture. No matter how you look at it, torture is apart of the world we live in.
ReplyDelete-Shivaram
Torture in my opinion is when you inflict pain onto the ones you maliciously want to hurt to whether to gather information or to be just plain demonic. Water boarding is an example of torture. The feeling that your drowning is a physical and emotional pain that your enduring on someone. If you can die from this, then its torture at its finest. I don't agree with the use of torture from a personal stand point, but from a political one, I believe that its use is necessary. The use of torture to find out information is effective and thus information has been proven to help the U.S. find and kill Osama Bin Laden. Yet, torture can also be abused, and can be inflicted on any prisoner that poses a threat to national security in the sake of preservation.
ReplyDeleteI don't really believe in torturing. I know people think it's effective in getting information out of people such as terrorists, or potential threats to our country, but I disagree with it. To me, torture is hurting someone physically or mentally to force them to either do something or say something. In this case, waterboarding is definitely torture and I'm glad we aren't allowed to use it anymore. Many argue that torture is effective, and obviously it is because of course if you're hurting someone enough they're going to agree to do something/ spew information. That's not the right way to go about it, though in my opinion. I feel that once you make a person comfortable enough to talk, they will. That and torture is not always so effective because the person being tortured could just get peeved and decide not to tell you anything. I just don't think torture is necessary, it's cruel and unusual punishment.
ReplyDeleteI would define torture as a tactic used by one to get information out of another, using harm. I think that water boarding is a great way to torture people. The feeling of drowning and suffocating is something tht someone can't ignore. One's body will automatically fight it. I think that torture in itself is useful and I think that it should not be frowned upon. The person being tortured usually isn't good anyways and it helps people in the long run. One can obviously see that torture is cruel, but it is helpful. The information that was gathered from torture helped lead to the assassination of Bin Laden. People should not be so worried about torture. It is the government simply doing its job to protect its people.
ReplyDeleteI would define torture as any act that causes intentional harm, physical or mental, to a person (including water boarding). Initially, I thought that the use of torture was necessary and felt that “All’s fair in love and war”. When I thought about it further though, I began to question it immensely. There is simply too much grey area that makes torture a scary thought for me. For example, whose job would it be to decide if the person in question knew “important” enough information to be tortured? Who would do the torturing? Who would be allowed to be tortured? Only terrorists? If so, then racial profiling will become an even bigger issue. I do not think that this tactic is effective either. If the government was ripping off my fingernails I might give false information so that they would stop. Furthermore, I believe that allowing our government the use of torture is giving the people in control way too much power. Once they are openly allowed the right to physically harm human beings just because they may have “important” information that the government would like to have, our rights are being diminished…once again. I don’t trust them enough to give them that type of power and physical control over me and my body. In addition, it's human nature to "take a mile" when you are "given an inch". For example, when the speed limit's 50, we go 60. If they changed the speed limit to 6, would we go that speed? No. We would go 70. We naturally push the envelope on every rule put in place to control us. Imagine what would happen if the U.S. allowed the use of torture.
ReplyDeleteI personally do not think that anybody should have to go through torture at any time in their life. As many people have already said, torture is an act that is going to harm somebody intentionally. I think that physcially abusing somebody until they "talk" is not the right or humane way to go about things. That is why I absolutely think that waterboarding is an example of torture. Is it effective? Unfortunately yes it is. In a lot of cases people will give in and eventually release the information that is wanted. The thought of torture is very scary to me, and I feel it should be done away with.
ReplyDeleteTorture is a sore topic. It seems to be an effective way of gaining information especially in the case of Osama Bin Laden. But this does not make it right. Just because the USA has gotten information by brutally beating someone or mentally abusing them does not make it the only source of gaining information. Aren't we a nation that protects people's rights? America is the land of the free so why are we holding people who haven't been charged with a crime in Guantanamo Bay. There are other ways to combat terrorism and gain information. Incentives have been proven to work extremely well especially in the police force when a criminal is given a plea bargain where they are given a shorter sentence or no sentence in exchange for information about other criminals. We should implement a system that doesn't involve extreme abuse for information because torture is just plain inhumane.
ReplyDelete