Torture as a Strategy of War

When torturing the person is treated as a thing rather than a human being. Regardless the circumstances, torture is never the way to go. It violates individuals rights and dignity. There are plenty of other better ways to obtain information from suspected terrorists that is less tragic. People can be tortured for little to no apparent reason at all. Some individuals are brought up at an early age to believe that terrorist methods are correct and that they should fight for what they love. Torturing suspected terrorist means that you are taking an unnecessary chance in torturing the wrong person. New techniques must be established. The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that cruel and unusual punishments should not be allowed. Torture is an act of violence that requires the use of many cruel and unusual punishments. When torturing no lessons are learned, no modesty gained and no moral principles are

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

Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are

According to the blog The Spector, “A terrorist group is believed to be in possession of a nuclear device. Time is desperately short, but we have captured a member of the group. In such circumstances, torture would surely be justified” (Andersen, 2014). Torture should be used in certain situations. In conditions when a child is being tortured is is not okay, but when it is a terrorist it is okay. Torture should be used when large groups of people are being threatened. According to The New York Times, “Torture can be morally justifiable, and even obligatory, when it is wholly defensive--for example when torturing a wrongdoer would prevent him from seriously harming innocent people” (Gutting, McMahan, 2015). Torturing people is okay when used right. People should only use torture when many other people's lives are at risk. Although torturing someone to save a large group of people may seem good, it’s not, because they could give false information to get you to stop, and you may injure more people than you

Gaul Rahman, a suspected Afghan radical, was arrested and brought to a CIA-run prison within six weeks of the 9/11 attacks. Rahman was detained for the purposes of providing inside information on the bombings, as well as to shed light on possible future terrorist attacks to be committed on United States soil. A month after his arrival at the prison, guards entered his cell to discover a gruesome sight. As quoted by the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture, “In November 2002, Gaul Rahman was shackled to his cell wall and made to rest unclothed on the bare concrete floor. The next day, the guards found Gaul Rahman’s dead body.” The junior officer that insisted on such treatment of Rahman was recommended by the CIA to receive a cash award of $2,500 for his superior work. Though the CIA praised the officer, many American citizens were appalled at Rahman’s treatment as detailed in the report, and the public became divided over whether Rahman’s treatment was humane. The concept of torture as a just means of security has become a significant source of dispute among the American public. With such divisiveness having the potential to create further discord in regards to the justice system and additional situations in which the use of torture is considered, a re-evaluation of interrogation policies is crucial to gain a position of solidarity on the issue. Despite the belief that torture is an effective means of combating terrorism against domestic interests, the need for

Is there a case for torture? Throughout the world for many centuries torture has been a highly debated and very controversial topic. It all started in Greece when slaves would get tortured to collect evidence for trials, crimes against the state, and treason. Not long after, the Roman Catholic Church and the Nazis’ began to use torture as well. During this time witnesses noticed what was going on and did not agree with it but had no way of stopping it. All across the world, a group of nations came together to make an agreement in opposition to torture. Not all nations were agreeing to not allow torture in their country, yet the majority of countries did agree. Even today it is hard to make the whole world agree to not doing something but making these agreements allow individual countries to comprise a support system. Many public figures and educators have made their opinion public but it has not yet evoked a change in the agreements originally set by the Geneva Convention. Torture is still today a very controversial topic with compelling arguments for both sides of whether to torture or to not.

Torture can be a useful tool. Many times torture is used to gather information that is needed to secure the country’s freedom from threats. By using torture, citizens have been protected from possible attacks, just like when Osama Bin Laden was captured. Torture can also act as a deterrent

If someone has information pertaining about a bomb that would kill thousands of innocent people, you would want to know about it. If they were not willing to give it up then torture would be necessary I know it is grim but is one life worth as many as thousands of lives. It is a tough call, but torture can be justified in some

First, torture doesn’t work. According to Michael Scheuer and Bob Baer, formerly a senior CIA official in the Counter-Terrorism Center, they both agree that torture doesn’t really work because if we torture people, they figure out what we want to hear and they tell us. Thus, the information we gather from torturing prisoners is not reliable and untruthful.

This causes multiple famous anti-torture supporters to collectively agree, that “Torture is justifiable, only when used to protect others” (Gutting, McMahan 5). So in theory, if someone planted a bomb in Times Square and the only way for the authorities to find it was to use torture, then in that scenario, it’s alright because it’s saving the lives of others. However, while this type of analogy may work for other situations, but it does not work in the defense of torture. This is due to the fact that countless reliable sources have given valid examples of information being gained without the need to use torture. Such as the men who helped locate Saddam Hussein by using non-violent interrogation

“Rather, this discussion deals with torture for the purpose of preventing a greater evil.” Page. 125

The United States Government should indeed use torture to not only combat terrorism, but to also make the world a safer place.

Since the beginning of time, torture has been used politically and socially to change the tides of civilization. The definition of torture according to Dictionary.com is, “the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or to force them to do or say something, or for the pleasure of the person inflicting the pain.” While this definition fully suits certain parts and certain peoples of the world, it does not or should not fit the United States’ definition in regards to human law. The Constitution and its moral rights have shaped America so that the American military (held to higher standards than any other military in the world) would not torture a person for the pleasure of inflicting pain

As is normally an upstanding practice in any research attempt, the history behind utilizing torture as a tactic against terrorism has to be examined before moving on to look at the other aspects behind these actions. Torturing terrorists has been a

I do not deny that torturing has a certain, though limited extent of usefulness. Quoting New York Times report in 20091, President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues that the banned harsh interrogation techniques by the U.S did help to produce useful information that helped the nation in it’s struggle against terrorism. The obtained information was valuable and there was no way of knowing if it could be obtained any other way. However, it must be noted that torture is only effective if the detainee is indeed guilty. There is unfortunately, no foolproof way of knowing this for certain. Hence in actual reality, torture is ineffective as it might result in the unintended death of the prisoner and counter-productive as it might lead to false information that was thrown out by the detainee as a desperate attempt to survive the torture techniques or as a