Torture Is A Violation Of Human Rights

Not only can torture do cruel things to the person receiving the affliction, but it can also affect the torturer. When a person gives torture, it damages the humanity of them, which means they will never be the same person again. When torture is used, the victim is treated as a “thing” rather than a person. The receiver is basically dehumanized to achieve the desires of the torturer. Although torture can be used to discover new information, it does not always work that way. Torture can cause inaccurate information to be provided due to the want for the torture to be finished with. In some cases, torture is not the

Torture has been used throughout history to obtain pertinent information from terrorists of the state by using many different techniques both physical and emotional. The definition of torture as it pertains to gaining information is 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” according to the Convention Against Torture. The legality of torture has been discussed within the international community multiple times creating multiple treaties. Such treaties came from the Geneva Convention and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. While the countries who sign these treaties have an obligation to create effective legislation against the torture of terrorists, some countries still skirt around the international laws. The United States has used torture in the recent years to obtain intelligence from suspected terrorists. The moral dilemmas behind these actions are controversial and are debated whether or not such actions should be used to achieve information. While some organizations believe the torture of terrorists is beneficial to the United States, torture is immoral, unjust, and should not be used by any organization or state to achieve its goals. The basis for the argument against torture can be affirmed using well known and accepted moral understanding from known

After the killing of Osama Bin Laden, former United States Vice President, Dick Cheney, proclaimed the CIA’s use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” such as waterboarding, against a terror suspect by the name of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed helped produce intelligence that led the CIA to Bin Laden. Cheney argued it was a good and legal program and that it was not torture. The use of EITs has sparked a debate in the public about the means of using torture in order to maintain security in the nation (Blakeley 544). The discussion about the use of torture in extreme situations has progressed since 2011 and remains a hot topic today. Torture has been used in many situations throughout history up to a recent past. It has been done both in secret and out in the open. Although many people are against torture in any situation, there are some people who justify the act of torture in extreme situations. The two sides show common ground in valuing human life and that torture is an extreme solution.

Torture is a topic that everyone has thought about or talked about at some point in their life. Many states have made it illegal to torture another person and have found it to be unconstitutional to treat someone this way. I do not feel that torture should be used on anybody no matter what the crime they committed. No one should be treated with such disrespect and humiliation just so the other person can get what they want. Torture is used to inflict severe pain on someone to get them to do something they don’t want to do. It is inhumane treatment of human beings and is brutal.

Torture is not acceptable in any cases, and if it is, then never to the point of death. There are three reasons why torture is unacceptable. Reason 1: Hurting people is wrong, especially if they did not do anything or know anything. Reason 2: Peace, Love, and Harmony are the things people are fighting for and why wreck it if we fought for it for a long time and still haven’t achieved it. Reason 3: Traumatic experiences of torture, which could make the victim want to torture someone else like the bullying theory.

stand in contrast to international treaties, conventions, and declarations that provide basic guidelines for the treatment of prisoners”. Also, torture violates human rights so, the US should not torture prisoner no matter what the situation is because the notion that torture might get the information blinds us to the other way that might be just as successful. Torture does not lead to the true. In some cases, innocent people are tortured and these people had to lie in order to stop the torturing

While the war on terrorism has required different strategies that were not utilized in other wars, the use of torture should not be included as new approach. The Geneva Conventions established protocols that ensured ethical treatment of prisoners because of the atrocities that happened in World War II. That being said, prisoners should be treated with respect, even if they are terrorists. Arthur Holmes (2007) states that, "It is an overall moral principle, all-inclusive and exceptionless, that should govern all of our actions"(p.54). Torture is never

The use of torture has been the subject of debate for centuries. With the growth of terrorism in recent years, the debate has become hotter as people justify torture or forbid it. There is no question, however, that the use of torture on captured criminals has reduced potential attacks on innocent civilians. Idebate.org contests that “With the use of modern technologies by intelligence services and the co-operation and exchanges of information between different intelligence agencies around the world, the likelihood of catching the wrong person has slimmed significantly.” This means that the terrorist in question is almost certainly the culprit. It is reasonable that torture be used on people that have homicidal intentions. Torture is necessary in today’s society due to the increase of violence because terrorists disregard the law, the time-ticking bomb scenario, and the fact that torture can deter other potential terrorists.

When we torture enemy combatants in Afghanistan or Iraq it is inhumane and the enemy is also a living human being. The reason we torture is because they have information we want that the enemy is not willing to give. So we force it out of them and that information could save lives. Torture could potentially kill a person and if you torture that person nonstop you could kill him/her.

Some may argue(and some have) that torture should be allowed on terrorists since they threatened the nation, but in reality, about a quarter of the people being tortured in the CIA prison are actually

Within Article 2 of the UN Convention Against Torture it declares that the use of torture is forbidden under any and all conditions and that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war… may be invoked as a justification of torture” (CAT). Thus, even if a nation or community is under terrorist threat

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.

Can torture be justified? Is it lawful to torture someone? And if yes, under what conditions? The subject of torture has been a controversial debate among many nations mainly the United States. One can agree that torture is wrong and should never be tolerated however others disagree. This subject takes us back to September 11, 2001 when the United States encountered al Qaeda attacks. Those in favor of torture mention its effectiveness in certain circumstances for instance some drafted memos about torture by the Deputy Assistant Attorney General back in 2002. The memos were presented to President George W. Bush after being signed by the Assistant Attorney General. The CIA as well as the Department of

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

First, it must be determined when it would be acceptable to use torture in an official capacity. It should not be used as a deterrent towards future heinous acts, although this may be a beneficial side effect. To torture someone simply to send a message to our nation’s enemies would not only be counterproductive but also an act of evil. While torture itself may be seen as evil by many, there are situations where it would potentially be more evil to do nothing at all. Creating a set of guidelines also mitigates the possibilities of greater harm done in the heat of the moment. Torture is already being employed by authority figures but without a clearly defined set of official guidelines. Michael Levin states that “[he] is advocating torture as an acceptable measure for preventing future evils (549).” The situations in which torture could be allowed must be emergent in nature, with the clearly defined possibility of death or injury to the innocent. Beating a confession out of a suspected murderer would not be an authorized use of torture, because the terrible event has already taken place. No one’s life is immediately at risk if