The Pros And Cons Of Waterboarding

One of the most controversial topics in the U.S. has been Enhanced Interrogation techniques- also believed to be torture. These practices are said to be implemented on suspected terrorists to recover possible information of future attacks on America, although many have concluded that this practice was created out of fear after the attack on September 11, 2001 (What Motivated CIA Torture?, 2014). Some of these practices include sleep deprivation, stress positions and even insects inside of a confinement box. One of the most controversial of all of the tactics is waterboarding or essentially drowning. Abu Zubaydah, the Al Queda

“Torture and abusive interrogation tactics are illegal under both U.S. law and international law. Torture is prohibited under federal law, as are lesser forms of detainee abuse such as cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” (Human Rights First)

The most valued documents in modern American society tend also to be the most heavily debated. For instance, interpretations of the United States Constitution tend to be rooted in one of two firmly entrenched beliefs;while the first camp believes it to be set in stone, the second his convinced that the United States Constitution is by nature a perpetually evolving document, meant to reflect the desires and needs of the people. Even amongst those in the same camp, disagreements abound; those believing that the Constitution is set in stone are divided on issues such as the eighth amendment’s prohibition of ‘cruel and unusual punishment’. It is difficult to reach a consensus on what, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. For example, the concept of waterboarding is championed by many as a ‘humane’ form of torture which causes no physical harm. However, it was deemed a cruel and unusual punishment due to the sensations of drowning and symptoms of mental illness which it produced in its victims. It can therefore be inferred that physical injury is not the only factor to be considered in whether or not a practice is to be deemed inhumane; factors such as mental wellbeing and fitness of punishment must also be considered. This leads one to ponder how the concept of solitary confinement could possibly even be considered when it so clearly violates the protections which the eighth amendment provides.

Bloche talks about how advanced interrogation and torture techniques have emerged to adapt to specific situations; and that many people believe that torture doesn’t help anything because people will say anything to get out of such tortures (Bloche 115). The article states that nothing can force someone to tell the truth; however, through harsh methods of abuse, you can instill a sense of hopelessness in the person being interrogated (Bloche

The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.

Indeed, waterboarding can actually lessen the brain’s ability to extract memory.” (Vivian Giang, “Neuroscience Proves Torturing Terrorists Won’t Keep us Safe”) There is scientific evidence that supports the idea that putting suspects in extreme situations only makes them tell less truthful things. Citing the work of the professor of experimental brain research Shane O’Mara, from University of Dublin’s Trinity College and director of its Institute of Neuroscience, there is little evidence that torture reveals useful

The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The fundamental idea of torture is to inflict mental or physical pain onto a suspect to coerce them into revealing information we desire. This tactic is illegal because it violates the Constitution, and in addition, it violates international agreements that our nation has committed itself to. The general provisions of the Geneva Conference of 1949 prevent the use of torture in warfare; the document specifically outlaws “Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating or degrading treatment…” By violating these laws, particularly the Constitution, our nation

Through out the history of the country, the U.S. have torture people for information. For example, Brown v. Mississippi a sheriff who questioned three African Americans, in the most heinous way. He hipped and hanged them for no true reason (Hickey, T., 2014). The

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.

Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. (85)

Today in the United States constitution we have the Eighth amendment which states that no person shall be subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual punishment encompasses a wide range of things including any form of torture. Using the Merian-Webster definition, “torture is the act of causing severe physical pain as a form of punishment or as a way to force someone to do or say something.”(2013) Whether it is for the most evil and heinous crime or a minor infraction torture is not admissible in any way shape or form. In his article, “On Waterboarding: Legal Interpretation and the Continuing Struggle for Human Rights,” Daniel Kanstroom goes into depth about the question, “Should we balance heinousness and cruelty against

In the United States legal system, torture is currently defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” as defined by Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (US Code, 1) Though this is a seemingly black and white definition, the conditional “…other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions…” have led many to question what precisely this entails. In other words, what are the lawful sanctions that permit such acts? Are they ethically right? Where is the line drawn as torture

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.

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

Waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay might sound enjoyable to the reader if they do not know the definition of these words. Waterboarding is a method of torture used to simulate the feeling of drowning, while Guantanamo Bay is a United States military prison where inmates are held without trial indefinitely. The article I chose for this essay discusses and analyzes the perils of the use of torture for interrogation during the American war on terror. During this period, towards the end of the Bush administration, the CIA used torture tactics, such as waterboarding, for interrogation, which caused concern and outrage in many American citizens. Political leaders remained unapologetic. When asked if he authorized such tactics, Vice President Dick Cheney's reply was that he was aware and supported them. Though legal action against political officials is required in some instances, brutality is still