The Pros And Cons Of Torture

Torture has been around for a long time. However, most countries in the world have supposedly stopped using it as an interrogation technique. In fact, it is outlawed by: the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United National Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and many other international conventions. Also, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court says that “torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” are war crimes and crimes against humanity (What does the law). In his essay “A Case for Torture,” though, Michael Levin argues that a case for using

Every human being has its rights protected by human rights conventions, and not being tortured is one of them. As such, torture should not be allowed in any case. A violation of a fundamental human right today may lead to more human rights violations in the future, and this is something that none of us wants. We are all equal in front of the law, and no one has the right to treat somebody else less than that, no matter part of which government s/he is or who s/he represents. According to the people who are against torture, no matter if a person is responsible for what s/he is being accused for, this should not in any case be used as a justification for torture. S/he should be sent to the court and should be judged according to the international laws. Another argument against the use of torture is that torture is cruel and immoral. No matter who are we dealing with, torture is something we should not use in any case. By using torture, you’re not only doing something immoral, but it also contributes to our society losing values. Torture is something that criminals use to obtain information from hostages. By torturing people, we are using the same means that terrorist use to get information from captured hostages. Torture is terrorism itself, and we don’t want to fight terrorism with torture. By using the same means that criminals do, aren’t we in a way being exactly like them?!

Should forms of torture be acceptable in order to protect the country? Would allowing torture corrupted or improve law? Could it give information that could stop future crime? Would torture go to extreme measures in simple quarrels? With torture beginning to take storm by media and society where can the facts lie? Would the torture method just be used to hurt people without probable cause?

The use of torture has been known to affect both the interrogator and the person being interrogated. Over time people have taken an illogical perspective of the word, torture. It has rapidly spread worldwide and now affects nations as a whole. Human rights advocates and those who are easily disturbed or squeamish, have taken a negative view on the use of it. However, torture can be vital and necessary for the national defense of a country. During terrorism, the human rights law's call for people to “respect and ensure” rights, and

This topic has been subjected to extreme debate. Many individuals hold different opinions especially after the tragic event of September 11th. Many believe that using torture as a tactic to gain valuable information from terrorist is justified for the purpose of preventing a greater evil. Others however, believe that the use of torture is immoral and counterproductive for the United States.

First, let’s address this issue from a purely moral standpoint. Torture is wrong. There is no denying that fact. To put another human being through events or situations that may damage them for the rest of their lives is not right. Even if some are reluctant to have sympathy for enemy combatants, the truth is that torture also remains engrained in the memories of those committing the heinous acts. In a study done by the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study (NVVRS), it found that “increased exposure to combat was correlated with increased psychological trauma. Those findings are well known. But a lesser-known part of the study also looked at ‘abusive violence’ – including torture – and found that it, too, had a high correlation with PTSD” (Phillips). According to the American Psychological Association, PTSD, or Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, is an anxiety problem that develops in some people after extremely traumatic events, such as combat, crime, an accident or natural disaster. What this study reveals is that, though we may think that there is only one victim

First, the particular situation of war justifies torture. Getting more information is important as much as win the battle. Essential information helps to predict the location where the enemy will drop the bombs or plan on genocide. And torture is an effective method to get reliable information from prisoners. War itself is against the ethics so once the war begins, every one has no choice not to be cruel for the victory of the country.

Torture has been so well known in history that it is looked upon as a key way to get info out of unwilling parties. However in some cases the use of the torture has completely taken away a humans rights. Besides in most cases than not the one being holded for tortue have did nothing wrong.

Torture should not be legalized in any special circumstances. It is unconditionally rejected. The first reason whether there will not be a utilitarian motivation to make lawful special cases. There is no space for exemptions because of the two fundamental arguments to the issue: The Ticking Bomb Situation (TBS), and torment creep. The ticking bomb situation, which asks: If a terrorist has planted a bomb in a building full of people, and refuses to confess where the bomb is hidden, given that there is no time to search the building nor to get all the people out to safety, is it acceptable to torture the terrorist in order to obtain that information? (O’Bryne 2003, p.155). TBS advocates often lack the courtesy to grant the same

In the discussion of torture, one controversial issue has been that torture could be used to save lives. On the one hand, torture is a good method that could save many lives. Others argue that it violates human rights. On the other hand, when torturing someone we could be given false information. Others even maintain the idea we should only use torture when dealing with terrorists. My own view is that torture should be used only by the military, and to get important information.

One of the greatest violations of human rights is torture. Torture is not simple to define but the most generic definition is the execution of physical distress upon others through brutality and assault, for different reasons most of the time for extracting data or for a declaration of guilt, however sometimes it is for the delight of being sadistic. Jonathan Power describes it as “the systematized use of violence to inflict the maximum amount of pain in order to extract information, to break resistance, or simply to intimidate” (O’Bryne 2003, p.140). Torture is a very old process; however, it has evolved with the civilization. According to the great writer Victor Hugo “torture has ceased to exist”; however that is definitely not true since torture has become a notion that is sold and bought in a market (O’Bryne 2003, p.144). In the last hundred years, torment techniques have evolved into being more clinical, more specialized, torture gear have evolved into a product to be purchased and sold on the market, governments have traded tips on effective torment methods – entirely despite of the fact that torment has become banned as per international law. Humans for a few hundred thousand years existed without utilizing torment; just in the last couple of thousand has it turned into a weapon of state.

“If something is good, you must torture it mercilessly until it’s either dead or great.” (Eno, no date) Brian Eno is a musician, and an advocate supporting torture. Torture is a method used by military forces to gather intel. This intel would be either national security, or having information on a person of interest. Osama Bin Laden was captured by the military due to the fact they could torture others. Reason for torture was that no one would give information freely, so the military needed to find a way to get it out. If it was not for torture people received, then who knows if such a person would've ever been caught. Many times it takes a long time to even get the information out of a person. This is why the military has come up with torture methods, and why they are able to use them. Obviously there are positives, and negatives to torture. In all reality if we are the good guys torturing others, then what separates us from the “bad” guys? In order to decide whether the government should be allowed to torture one must first know the history, and forms of torture in order to understand where it is seen today.

Throughout history, torture was used a method to punish those who broke laws or defied traditional ideals. An example of this would be from medieval Spain when the Spanish Inquisition would torture those who didn’t follow the orthodox Catholic ideology. The methods that were used were outright painful, humiliating, and lethal, but it was often justified at the time. In modern times, torture cannot be justified. Torture is defined, by the United Nations in Article I of the Convention against Torture, as any “act by which severe pain and suffering… is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining information… a confession… [or] punishment for an act” (United Nations). With this definition, one can simply look at the current status of the United States’ so-called enhanced interrogation and justify that it is a method of torture. Any arguments that are in favour of torture are also, inherently, in favour for the violation of inalienable human rights. Torture shouldn’t and mustn't be used for three main arguments: it is brutal, and it is inhumane, and it doesn’t always work. If someone needs information, then it must be acquired through peaceful means.

Torture is a way that pain and suffering is felt, like mental or physical pain, so an action is implied on a person in order to get information about something for being suspected or someone who have information which may be useful in order to save others life or anything else that might be important to get the information about it. Moreover, torture might be acceptable and might not be in most of the world but according to UN’s reporters in the security council that torture is still global since 102 countries still support torturing like Egypt, china, Korea and also most African countries (The print edition: International, 2007) .Therefore, torture is acceptable because it can decrease terrorism, know the truth,

Torture is act of intentionally causing pain physically or mentally to a person to get some information from the person or from a third person, but torture is not a legal act. Torturing a criminal can be justified in cases where it is