Persuasive Essay Torture

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.

While needing to be in survival mode this day in age people would ask for a smartphone with an internet card, or unlimited data. I’m not the one to ask for that. The three items that I would ask for would have to be heavy clothes, more snack foods and a flashlight. In that order. I will begin to tell you exactly why I chose each of these items in very good detail.

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.”

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.

Enhanced Interrogation Techniques have their situational uses. One major claim is the lauded Ticking Time Bomb scenario in which the case is laid out in a needs of the many versus the needs of the one format. The premise as given by Bob Brecher is thus, “Suppose there is good reason to think that someone has planted a bomb in a public place. And suppose there is good reason to think that it is going to go off in the next two hours or so, and that it is going to kill and maim dozens of people, maybe hundreds. The question is all too real. Imagine, to bring the example closer to home, that the police or the secret services had known that bombs were shortly to go off somewhere in Bali, Madrid, Lonon or Sharm-el-Sheikh in the attacks of 2004 and 2005. But no one knows where the bomb is – except one person, who is already in custody. Naturally they have no intention of revealing where the bomb is. Maybe they have planted it themselves; maybe not. Either way, they remain silent. Should they be tortured to force them to reveal where the bomb is?”(Torture and the Ticking Bomb 1). In this scenario there is substantial moral justification for torture. Consider this, law enforcement believes that torturing the target will save

Also, if the torturee is a suspected terrorist, he is likely to know that there are limits to the amount of pain being inflicted upon him. Furthermore, the torturee will know precisely when the bomb will go off, so he knows how long his has to endure the interrogation. Also according to Brecher, there is a very realistic chance that the bombers are going to leave a very small window of time between the planting of the bomb and it going off, thus preventing a premature finding of the bomb, and also preventing long periods of interrogation if by chance anyone involved gets caught. Brecher also states that it is likely that most terrorists will die for their cause, as we have seen on September 11th, so they are more than likely willing to plant false tales under interrogational torture.

Torture has long been used by law enforcement agencies and governments to questions criminals and terrorists. It is used to coax confessions or to find out any sort of information that may lead to the arrest or capture of other criminals. Although the torturing of prisoners in the United States is strictly prohibited by the constitution, the government started using the tactic waterboarding against terrorists. Although the government says waterboarding has led to prevention on mass terrorist attacks on U.S soil, it is not accepted by all of this country’s citizens. It is believed by certain people that waterboarding is torture and others do not believe it is. It is my goal to explore why the United States deemed this

As the country goes through its tenth year of the war on terror one can look back and see some of the policy differences that has plagued this country when, as a nation, our young men are sent to war. Everything, in this author’s view needs to be on the table, and transparent. Of course, troops strength, strategy, and general war plans should be kept from the enemy, the need of informing our own people has been a tight rope that is not easy to balance on for any one person. This was especially true of the “enhanced interrogations” used by the Bush administration at the beginning of the War on Terror. What this paper plans to do is to explain the four greatest

‘Phycologists find these tactics immoral and beyond torturous, and a ticking time bomb for disaster (O’Donohue).’ Although not everyone disagrees with the tactics Research has shown that these interrogations both have pros and cons. Research from the Phycological association shows that these types of interrogations “betrays trust and human rights, professional ethics and the society's trust (Pope).” For example, many believe that the interrogations break the Miranda rights per the 5th amendment, but others argue that the 5th amendment rights should be reserved only for people holding a valid US citizenship. (Rychlak) Medical ethics of the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, because these facilities are not on US soil the 5th Amendment rights should also apply to these detainees that are detained, making it a national policy. (Quinn) After the 9/11 attacks congress authorized president Bush to authorize “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons’ (Worthington).” However, this was quickly shut down by former

Following along with the ticking time bomb scenario or any other future terrorist attack, many opponents of torture like to argue, how do the investigators really know the person they have in custody is for sure the terrorist who knows where the location of the bomb is or any other information that is needed. What if that isn’t the right person and the one who is in custody is being tortured but is completely innocent. The way that technology is improving and advancing from day to day, the idea of being wrong is very rare (Torture). Before investigators and researchers take the time to arrest the terrorist and get them in custody, they do precise investigations to make sure they are right. They will not take into custody and torture the person

The most ethical resolution for torture in interrogations is to allow it to only happen during certain times. Psychologists should develop a method where minimal risks of long term problems occur. I believe this is the most ethical way, because to protect national security we need information about terrorist attacks quickly. Additionally, America needs to be able to trust the source of the information. I also believe that the CIA should also perform back ground checks on the people being questioned to prevent the risk of hurting innocents. I believe that this will be justified, because we should protect the majority while taking the fewest causalities. We will need to obtain the information so there would be no further attacks and we could

Is waterboarding suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay justifiable in order to save American lives? For years since the attacks on 9/11, prisoners suspected of terrorist actions have been treated poorly and taken to bases like Guantanamo Bay where they are interrogated and abused past levels of legality. This is upsetting how the United States government tortures people only suspected of terrorist activity. There have been many incidents where innocent people were accused of terrorist activity and harassed. After the bombing of the Boston Marathon, three innocent muslim men were put in custody to answer some questions on the bombing (Friedersdorf). The innocent men had done nothing wrong but the United States has a history of fighting terrorism in a very forceful way. Is it “okay” to question anyone without legal justification? In the US, the fear of terrorism has

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).”

For instance, when British officers interrogated a group of terrorist suspects, they confessed while being tortured and said they had got their training from al-Qaeda soldiers in Afghanistan, when in actuality, they were taught in the United Kingdom (Bellamy). In order for an interrogation to be successful the essential information must be elicited within the first few hours of the terrorists’ arrest or else the terrorist group will alter their plans once they find out one of their own has been arrested, subsequently the information given by the captured terrorist becomes worthless. Also, the abuse of human rights through torture techniques will add further hate-sentiment between the United States and the Islamic people

These considerations certainly establish a compelling argument for the use of waterboarding as a means to collect important information in a combat environment. There are, however, compelling arguments against the use of any form of torture. One of the more prominent arguments is that it does not provide officials with any actual intelligence. A former FBI interrogator, Ali Soufan, presents a logical argument that waterboarding does not work. He explains that two terrorists, Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, were waterboarded 83 and 183 times respectively (Collins, 2014). It is hard to imagine that anything beyond the first few attempts would have truly provided any form of actionable intelligence. At this point in their torture, these two terrorists may only provide false information that may seem important. In their eyes, this would provide the quickest