Twisting the Laws of Torture
Should the U.S. be allowed to use torture in foreign interrogation?
The U.S. military and CIA forces have been using torture to pull information out of detainees since it was legalized after 9/11 although revoked in 2009. The use of torture mechanisms has been used in many instances and in many forms. Some acts of torture even result in death upon these detainees. In this moment it is against federal law, and therefore should not be used unless the law changes sometime soon. Which is very possible as Donald Trump has a very different perspective from Barack Obama and is in the process of changing many of decisions Obama made during his presidency. Therefore torture should be used as a last resort when interrogating foreign detainees.
It seems with Trump’s presidency comes torture. The debate on whether the U.S. should return to torture methods in foreign interrogations has been buzzing since Gina Haspel was nominated for the CIA and spoke out against torturing the detained foreigners. She stands for empathetic tactics to elicit information, Whereas Trump feels that torture would be an efficient alternative. Tortue in itself is unethical and currently illegal in the U.S., the methods can be temporarily painful or even life-threatening and should only be used as a last resort in extremely
…show more content…
Bush creating a way to “prevent something like this from happening again.” The Bush Administration allowed the CIA and the U.S. Military to use “enhanced interrogation techniques,” allowing them to use torture techniques against the detainees. In 2009 President Barack Obama issued Executive Order 13491 to ensure lawful interrogations (Johnson 2017). But what exactly is this EO protecting people from now? Use of unnecessary force to draw out answers rather than ethical
This program meant that the presidency had begun to ignore law. For Savage, Bush and Cheney’s authorization to ignore law, “was no different in principle between the warrant law and any other law that regulates how the president can carry out his national security responsibilities.” Furthermore, Savage claims, that this act “locked down the president’s power to arrest U.S. citizens on U.S. soil and imprison them in a military brig without trial if he or she thinks they pose a terror threat.” What Savage argues is that Bush through Cheney’s “signed statements” did not need to seek congressional approval, but as president could enact in any manner that he, as president, deemed necessary in order to protect the
Ross, Brian and Richard Esposito. “CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described.” 18 Nov. 2005. Web. 6 Nov. 2013.
Capital punishment and torture are often looked down on in today’s societies because they are viewed as cruel and unconstitutional, but perhaps they would help in more ways then we would like to admit. They can be beneficial in many ways such as encouragement to be truthful, encouragement to live by the laws, and as a source of punishment. Capital punishment and torture are thought to be too painful, and the person doing the punishment is also committing a crime.
The issue of torture is nothing new. It was done in the past and it’s done now in the 21st century. Without saying one side is right and the other side is wrong, let us discuss the part that we agree on and find common ground. We as Americans want to protect Americans from harms. So how do we prevent that from happening without torturing? It is impossible to get answer without some sort of questioning and intimidation techniques, since we know captured prisoners during war are not easily going to give up information. We know the enemy we face doesn’t follow the Geneva Convention or any law that pertains to war, so does that mean we shouldn’t also follow the Geneva Convention also, which prohibits torture? Of course not, because we want to be example for the world. Republicans argue that we have to do whatever is necessary to keep Americans safe, and Democrats argue it goes against our values and makes us look bad. We as Americans, as leader of the free world we
Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, were used in previous administrations. The techniques were considered at the very least to be cruel and inhuman. Among these are attention strikes and stress positions. The techniques violate human rights as well as detainee rights. There are few serious arguments for the retention of enhanced interrogation. The most compelling is the "ticking time bomb theory." This theory is in fact based on logical fallacy. An executive order has banned the use of enhanced interrogation. It is the position of this summary that the current ban remain in effect.
Is the intentional pain that an individual experiences justified if there is the potential to save the lives of many? Torture is the most used weapon in the “war against terrorism” but does it work? The purpose of this essay is to identify what the motives for torturing are, the effectiveness of torture, and important issues with the whole process of torture.
Torture is the act of inflicting severe pain or suffering, mental or physical, on an individual to obtain information, to intimidate or for punishment. Torture is expressed in many ways, for example, rape, hard labour, electric shock, severe beatings, etc, and for this reason it is considered as cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment. Therefore, it is a violation of human rights and is strictly prohibited by international law. Michael Davis and many other individuals have stated that torture is worse than murder. He claims, “Both torture and premature death are very great evils but, if one is a greater evil than the other, it is certainly torture”. With that being said, there are three major reasons to discuss, in which, torture is not morally acceptable. However, in many cases it is considered very beneficial, but the disadvantages outweighs the benefits. Firstly, bullying is a form of torture but to a lesser extent, in which it results in an individual suffering from low self-esteem, suicidal thoughts, self-harm, etc. In addition, torture is mainly used as a means to obtain information, however, it is an ineffective interrogation tool in which, the data given could be falsified. Lastly, torture is sometimes utilized to shatter the autonomy of individual, that is, the right to their freedom and independence, forcing the victim to succumb to the torturer’s way of thinking.
Enhanced interrogation methods include hypothermia, stress positions, waterboarding, and sleep deprivation. In each of these cases there have been studies such as, the one concocted by Dr. Allen Keller, of Bellevue NYU Program for Survivors of Torture. Dr. Keller once said, “Some victims were still traumatized years later. A man who had experienced waterboarding couldn’t take showers and panics when it rains.” In January 22, 2009, President Obama, signed an executive order that requires both the U.S. military and paramilitary organizations to use the Army Field Manual as the guide of getting information from prisoners, moving widely away from the Bush administration tactics. In this manual none of these enhanced interrogation methods are acceptable. If indeed, any person or persons were caught using any of these outlawed interrogation methods, they would be subject to a fine of 10,000 dollars and a life term of imprisonment. This is true even if you showed the intent to commit torture, but never actually committed the crime. If there is sufficient evidence to prove intent, then you are subject to 25 years of imprisonment. The means to not justify the necessity when it comes to enhanced interrogation. It can lead to false information, if someone is falsely accused of a crime and therefore detained by the military with no evidence and then tortured; in most scenarios an innocent person will admit to their accusation to avoid the undeniable pain of torture. There has to be due process and torture should and never will be the answer. All in all, enhanced interrogation is a technique used to induce information from possible suspects; however, this technique is immoral in ways such as, but not limited to, impacting the victims life, f...
Until there is a credible way to determine whether or not torture is in fact effective, I pass judgment that the practice should be discontinued. The question as to if the torture policy is a human rights violation or if it holds crucial necessity, is not answered in the essay. Applebaum explores the reality that torture possesses negative implications on the inflictor. After presented with the compelling stance and evidence, Applebaum raises the interesting question as to why so much of society believes that torture is successful. I agree that the torture policy is wrong, a point emphasized by Applebaum, contrary to the popular attitude surrounding the topic.
After 9-11 George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the CIA used loopholes to torture the suspects after the attack. Al Qaeda terrorists were not classified under prisoners of war and there was a genuine concern of other attacks to follow (Yoo 1). Under these interpretations and bending of the laws Bush was legal and justified in the actions taken. The Bush administration picked waterboarding as their main force when torturing the masterminds behind the attacks. Waterboarding was picked because they had been training special force teams and tens of thousands of other soldiers before the attacks, and it was stated that they
Though torture and enhanced interrogation are similar in that they both force information from captured individuals, they are basically different due to motives as well as extreme measures used. Enhanced interrogation is used by the United States for certain interrogation methods including “walling, facial hold, facial slap, cramped confinement, wall standing, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and water boarding” (Quigley 3). This method of interrogation is protected against international criminal prosecution. However, torture is known as the practice of inflicting “cruel, inhumane, degrading infliction of severe pain” (Beehner 1) and is “often used to punish, to obtain information or a confession, to take revenge on a person or persons or create terror and fear” (Quiroga 7). Like enhanced interrogation, torture can be used to retrieve information. However, the motive of using torture is not always to save lives. Although enhanced interrogation us...
...less outside of intimidation. Currently we are debating whether torture would be a useful tool in society, but some have solved the answer for us many years ago. Those who commit crimes are often willing to sacrifice their life to keep the secret. Torture simply lowers us to their standards and facilitates increased terrorist activity in the long run. Why put salt on the wound when you have a Band-aid? Torturing cannot be morally justified.
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.
Around the world and around the clock, human rights violations seem to never cease. In particular, torture violations are still rampant all over the world. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but surreptitiously still violate them. The US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia all have failed to end torture despite accepting the provisions of the Convention.
From a moral standpoint, torture is wrong and unacceptable. Many religious people are against this act of violence because they see it as a violation of the dignity of a human being. Humans have the right to not have intentional harm upon themselves from others. The ban on torture furthermore supports this certain right. Not only does torture violate people’s rights, but they also violate the demands of justice. In the past, many of our nation’s people have been tortured and we have had a problem with it; but when it’s not you the one that is being tortured, it seems to be fine. Have you heard of the golden rule, “Treat others only as you consent to being treated in the same situation? (7)” This applies very well to this problem.