Is Torture Wrong

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

I have been unable to deliberate on the appropriate alternative method for this particular dilemma. When it comes to the topic of torture, the popular attitude is that it is sometimes required. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of ethics and efficiency. Whereas some are convinced that it is an effective policy, others maintain that it is not successful practice. To further support the stance that the torture policy is not necessary effective, Army Col. Stuart Herrington inserted, in his experience, “nine out of ten people can be persuaded to talk with no 'stress methods' at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones.”

David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are

Interrogational torture is one of the many tough ethical questions that people debate about in the United States. Is it right or is it wrong? Many believe that the United States does not practice intense interrogational acts such as torture. Many people have fought to abolish any form of torture while many fight to keep some forms of it to help keep the peace. Whether you believe in it or not, torture is and will always be an ethical dilemma that comes up.

The torture has been used as one of the ways to obtain decisive information from people. The military and intelligence agency paid more attention to psychiatric research than the medical profession. They thought that it would be very effective if they can use psychological factors for interrogation. This technique was secretly developed by the intelligence agencies such as CIA and KGB, but little was known about it.

Coercive interrogation does not work in producing timely, reliable, and life saving information. Thus far, much of the discussion in this area has been concerned with the procedural, legal, and philosophical issues raised by torture. Only very limited attention has been given to the issue of effectiveness. Even if one concludes that torture can sometimes be riddled with moral objections, the argument for coercive techniques depends on the assumption that torture is an effective means of obtaining information. This is a dubious assumption. Scientific investigations of torture as an effective tool of interrogation have found no evidence that it is effective. That conclusion comes from a 2006 report on torture by the Intelligence Science Board. If torture is not an effective means to deduce information from a suspect, it is difficult to justify torture, as many experts in the field agree, even if you assert that it is necessary in certain circumstances. In addition, even if torture may work, if there are other ways to elicit information, the use of torture is not necessary. Lastly, it is super counter intuitive and has the potential to lead to radicalization.

Furthermore, enhanced interrogation is useless because it does not pressure a detainee to speak the truth, but instead withholds precise and credible information from U.S federal agencies. In fact, according to 25 former interrogators and intelligence professionals from the U.S military say that, “ the application of psychological, emotional, and physical pressure can force a victim of torture to say anything just to end the painful experience. Neuroscience professor, shane O’mara says that” abusive interrogation techniques can “ compromise memory, mood, and eliciting accurate information, (O’mara).” Also, “The 1992 U.S. Army Interrogation Field Manual 34-52 states: “Experience indicates that the use of prohibited techniques is not necessary to gain the cooperation of interrogation sources, ( Interrogation Field Manual).” Use of torture and other illegal methods is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear, (CCR Justice).”

People argue that torture is necessary during interrogation to gain information that will save lives. There are a wide variety of situations that could happen during the process of interrogation, and not every circumstance can be prepared for. “Not every situation can be limited to the same set of rules and regulations” (Jacobs and Newton). The main argument used to justify the ethical use of torture is a ticking time-bomb situation. If the captured terrorist does not talk, hundreds of people

The most well-known support for torture is the “ticking time bomb” scenario. The author of “Case for Torture” gives an example of this by asking the reader to “suppose a terrorist has hidden an atomic bomb on Manhattan Island” (Levin 95) but will not “disclose where the bomb is” (95). In doing this, the reader reflects on how effective torture would be in this specific situation. However, the argument fails to address that torture is not the only way to gain information or more importantly, that it is the correct information. Neurologist Lawrence Hinkle, who examined Korean War veterans after communist “brain-washing” stated that “any circumstance that impairs the function of the brain potentially affects the ability to give information and well as the ability to withhold it” (Arrigo 547). This proves that just because torture is being used does not guarantee that the terrorists will give all information up. They can easily create a lie or withhold the truth. Therefore, torture is

Although this paper will focus on the significant number of false confessions that result from torture, we must note that false confessions do not account for every case of violently extracted information; there exist cases where people reveal all intelligence they possess to interrogators when confronted with excruciating pain.

People’s imaginations start to go wild when they hear the word torture. However, there are enhanced interrogation techniques that are more humane than others. Waterboarding, for example, simulates the effect of drowning and is highly recommended by people such as former Vice President Dick Cheney (Defrank). It is highly unpleasant, but breaks no bones and leaves no bruises. It also exposes those performing the interrogation to lesser psychological strain than other methods that could be used would. Torture is accused of being a cancer in society, but if regulated and reserved for the “especially” bad guys, societal homeostasis would be maintained.

Consider the following situation: You are an army officer who has just captured an enemy soldier who knows where a secret time bomb has been planted. Unless defused, the bomb will explode, killing thousands of people. Would it be morally permissible to torture them to get him to reveal the bomb’s location? Discuss this problem in light of both Utilitarian and Kantian moral theories and present arguments from both moral perspectives for why torture is morally wrong.

Torture has been used secretly around the world for the purpose of gaining information. It is believed that humans are afraid of pain and we all are willing to do everything in order to alleviate the pain, so torture is viewed as one of the most effective interrogative techniques. It is often claimed by those who advocate torture that in critical situations, where a number of lives are at sake including your family members, torture should be used to extract information for lives-saving from the suspects. Nevertheless, there are many refutable points in this claim. It is true that in such situation, the truth is highly needed. However, the information gained through torture is undependable because the victims will only confess whatever the interrogators

In examining the foremost interrogation methods used, this essay will utilise the distinction drawn by Meissner et al between information-gathering and accusatorial approaches as a means to highlight coercive practices within interrogations. The accusatorial method uses psychological manipulation in order to establish control of a suspect and achieve confession. This method is typified by the approach of the United States through their use of the

When the magistrate questions Colonel Joll’s inhumane acts of interrogation, Joll replies that torture only plays into situations “in which I am probing for the truth, in which I have to exert pressure to find it… I get lies, then pressure, then more lies, then more pressure, then the