When Torture Is Good

Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case

David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are

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.

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.

From the perspective of someone like Kant who believes that morality is absolute and torture is wrong, then it is never acceptable no matter what the consequences. Kant would argue that it is better to allow a 'ticking bomb' to go off and kill thousands by not using torture than to willingly torture someone, because as mere mortals we can never know for certain what the ultimate results of our actions will be - there may not be a bomb at all, or the man you have may not be the one who set it, or someone else may disarm it - but we can be certain of our intent, and thus we should never act with evil intent, which wilful torture certainly is.

Under no circumstances should torture be an acceptable method to gain intelligence. In specific situations, stress positions can be adequate as long as they’re still within the parameters of the Geneva Conventions. The United States signed the document at the Convention Against Torture and thus needs to uphold the conditions of the agreement. Through the works of Hooks and Mosher and the Torture Memos, I hope to justify my belief that torture is unacceptable.

Torture has been a long standing controversy which seems to been coming up more frequently nowadays among politicians and media alike. There has always been the key argument if a man’s life is justifiably bad enough to torture and hurt, to get necessary information from. Since the beginning of our foundation torture was made a marque laws requiring the government and states alike from using, “cruel and unusual punishments” on any American prisoners (“FindLaw”). However in 2006 slight adjustments to this law were put in effect to create opportunities for getting information out of foreign captives (“FindLaw”). These prisoners were taken from the standard US judicial review and instead put under the terms of habeas corpus. This allowed the US

Many opinions have been historically perceived on modern debates about the moral principles of torture. Torture has been carried out or sanctioned by individuals, groups, and states throughout history from ancient times to modern day, and forms of torture can vary greatly in duration from only a few minutes to several days or longer. (Torture, 2016). Torture is the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty. (Torture, 2016). Now that we have an idea behind the meaning of torture, we need to know if it is ethical. Ethical can be described as fair, legitimate or moral. All and all, is torture the right thing to do? Let’s take a look at some of the reviews of those that are skilled professionals in discussing if it is just or permissible to use torture.

After the horrific terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the United States made drastic changes to its policy on terrorist. The president at the time, George W Bush declared war on terrorism, specially targeting the terrorist group, Al Qaeda, who claimed responsibility for the September 11 attacks. The new policy on how to deal with terrorist allowed for the use of torture or in other words, doing whatever necessary to get answers. Since then, many controversies have risen about this topic, the main discussion is whether the use of torture on terrorist is morally acceptable or not. In this essay I will explain my reasoning’s for why I believe the use of torture is ethically immortal while using ethical thermos to explain my view point on

Maria, I agreed with you on some points. Howeve,r I think that torture will not always lead to the truth. First, the US is a country that respects human rights, and torture is a method that goes against human rights. Torture someone will not always lead to the true. Some people lie just because they are being tortured by giving false information. Furthermore, torture can lead to death and maybe the person being torture is the only one that can provide the information needed. I believe that there is another way out to find the true. I agree with you that sometimes innocent people are tortured just because they suspect that they can provide some information that can lead to the one needed.

Research and case studies have concluded that once torture is approved, it is very difficult to monitor and contain. Torture has proven to not produce reliable information but it may persist in society as it provides a psychological need in times of great stress such as war. Specifically, it may reinforce the idea that the interrogator is in “control” of the situation and may be a possible way to “get back” at the enemy force. Although supporters argue that specific torture techniques extract vital information; it has been proven to actually increase the difficulty of extracting information. It is unknown to the full extent of how damaging mentally being tortured and the full toll it can take on a person’s

Another alternative explanation pertaining to the proposed relationship between the frequency of terrorism and the influx of torture may be a result of the alleged effectiveness of such techniques. Despite the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture, some senior Five Eyes intelligence officers support the effectiveness of torture and believe that the techniques were critical to protect national security. Specifically, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has taken the position that EIT and other methods designed to ensure national security and save lives should be the most important priority for policymakers. For this reason, CIA officials have suggested that more coercive methods be used against suspected terrorists, even if the

You awaken in a dark room, with no recollection on how you got their. You realize that you sitting across from a few men, with a table separating from you. Next to the men you see a bucket filled with water a rag. You are blinded by a bright white light and one of the men bangs on the table and says, “We know you are with terrorists. So where are they hiding?” You answer almost immediately saying that you’re not a terrorist and have no idea. Then men ask again and you give the same answer. The men get furious and drag you out of the chair and force you to lie down on the table, tying you to it. They ask one more time, “where are the others?” You respond with the same answer as before, “I don’t know.” The men then put the rag on your face and

Consider the following situation: You are an army officer who has just captured an enemy soldier who knows where a secret time bomb has been planted. Unless defused, the bomb will explode, killing thousands of people. Would it be morally permissible to torture them to get him to reveal the bomb’s location? Discuss this problem in light of both Utilitarian and Kantian moral theories and present arguments from both moral perspectives for why torture is morally wrong.