Roshan Tadi
Bratt
English 101
3/3/14
Ethical Approach on Torture
Torture, as defined by the Oxford dictionary is the action of forcing a person to expose something through pain and suffering (“Definition of Torture in English”, 1). It has been a very effective means of extracting information. The practice of torture was originally used on slaves to increase productivity. It later proved to be an efficient approach to force individuals to disclose information. Many civilizations have used this practice throughout history, each with their own unique way. The Greeks used a technique known as the brazen bull. This approach consisted of a victim to be placed in an iron bull and steamed alive (Blinderman, 1). A very gruesome and agonizing approach but widely accepted at the time because it delivered results. Torture, though a controversial topic today, should be acceptable, because firstly, it can lead to the gathering crucial intelligence, secondly, it is a quick approach to gain said information, and finally, it is can be sanctioned in an ethical aspect.
Ex-president George W. Bush asserts, “Abu Zubaydah also provided information that helped stop a terrorist attack being planned for inside the United States -- an attack about which we had no previous information.” Abu Zubaydah was a high-ranking Al Qaeda official who was water boarded (Luban, 1). Water boarding is a form torture that simulates drowning. Through this form of torture, the US was able to receive vital information that led to the prevention of a bomber decimating a bridge. Moreover, the CIA was able to extract this information and incarcerate the criminal. Though many lives were potentially saved, Bush was criticized for allowing the action of torture. He se...
... middle of paper ...
...s invaluable. The efficacy of torture can be seen in the capture of Zubaydah and the prevention of the “Dirty bomber,” Jose Padilla. Effectiveness has also been proven; it has hypothetically saved many lives and has prevented many plots known to the general public. Ex-Vice President Dick Cheney said in a speech in 2009 that the “enhanced interrogation” of detainees “prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people” (“The Report of The Constitution Project's Task Force on Detainee Treatment”, 1). Since it has been deemed illegal by the UN it has to be done in secrecy. In result, it cannot be deduced how much has been prevented by this procedure since that information is classified. However, it is irrefutable that torture, in its essence, is beneficial and should be accepted as a means of ensuring public safety.
Torture is a loaded word. It conjures images in a readers' mind of any number of horrors, physical and mental. Many writers rely on this reaction and use pathos in their articles to illicit a strong response in their audience. Pathos is an emotional appeal used to gain sympathy and trust from the audience and works for people of all intellectual levels. It often casts the author or characters in a story as an Everyman, easy to identify, and therefore see eye to eye, with. In my opinion, the more an author is able to create a personal connection to torture, the stronger their argument becomes. Strong emotions create a more appealing argument for an everyday audience.
In his essay “The Case for Torture,” printed in The Norton Reader 13th Edition, Michael Levin argues that torture is justified and necessary under extreme circumstance. He believes that if a person accepts torture to be justified under extreme cases, then the person automatically accepts torture. Levin presents weak argument and he mostly relies on hypothetical scenarios. There is not concrete evidence that torture solves problems and stop crime but rather the contrary. Under international law, torture is illegal and all the United Nation members have to abide by those rules. The use of torture does not keep people safe, but rather the opposite. Torture has a profound effect on democracy. As the use of torture becomes normal in society, the right of the citizen will suffer greatly.
Michael Levin's article on "The Case for Torture." is an article which mainly discusess the use
In “The Case for Torture,” Michael Levin presents logical fallacies that originate at the authors desire to relate the importance of his message. Though his specific argument is a very plausible solution to a taboo problem, the manner in which he presents it has some fallacies that cause it to be unsupported
The method of interrogation, water boarding may be controversial but I think it is necessary in order to extract vital information from Al Qaeda operatives and other terrorists groups.
When the news of torture at Abu Ghraib prison broke in early 2004 during the “global war on terror,” much of the public was outraged and did not know how to react. Heavy debate began over the issue and media reporters on the issues took sides. Many books were written about the subject. The conservatives attempted to downsize the issues and take the side that it was simply ‘bored’ and ‘tense’ soldiers trying to blow off a little steam with horseplay. However, the photographs that surface said quite differently. Naked photographs of prisoners engaged in simulated sexual acts, deceased prisoners in sexual poses and prisoners tied up and left for dead tell the chilling story of the terror and torture behind the prison walls. Did the US do anything to stop or lessen such torture committed by American soldiers? Most will say that they did not. To some this may considered a crime and to others it is simply “common military practice”.
In “The Case For Torture” an article written by Michael Levin, he attempts to justify the use of torture as a means of saving lives. Throughout the article, Levin gives the reader many hypothetical examples in which he believes torture is the only method of resolution. Though I agree with Levin, to some degree, his essay relies heavily on the fears of people and exploits them to convince people into thinking pain is the only way. In certain aspects, I could agree entirely with Levin, but when one reads deeper into the article, many fallacies become apparent. These fallacies detract from the articles academic standing and arguably renders the entire case futile. Levin’s strategy of playing with the fears of people is genius, but, with more creditable details of the issue the article would have sustained the scrutiny of more educated individuals. The addition of more concrete information, would have given people something to cling to, inherently improving the articles creditability.
“Torture is what Al Qaeda terrorists did to 2,977 Americans on 9/11” said Cheney (“Is Torture Ever Justified”). The torture that happened could have been prevented if the building construction would of had been completed, a lot better communication, start fighting off the terrorist when they were giving us hints, and higher security. The terrorist attacks on September Eleventh could have been prevented.
The definition of 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 (Webster). There have been different hypothetical situations looking at using torture to get a positive end result and how it could be successful. There should be strict restrictions, rules and guidelines that go along with using torture as a means to justice. Pro torture is not meant to be used for just any circumstance, but when many people are in danger and questions are not being answered, a certain type of punishment like torture could solve the case/save many lives.
Torture is the intentional infliction of extreme physical suffering on some non-consenting, defenseless person. Torture in any form is used to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure.
The motivation to torture is guided by gut feelings and “what if” stories. Using torture to gain information involves a tremendous amount of assumptions. The Torturer is assuming that there is an actual danger, they are assuming that they have the correct person as well as assuming their level of their involvement and guilt in the situation, and lastly by using torture they are assuming that there is no alternative way to extract the information.
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.
Ever since the attack on the world trade center, Americans have become more aware of their surroundings and possible scenarios that could take place anytime and anywhere. After 9/11 the U.S. military began more sophisticated interrogations on individuals that could possibly lead to terrorism outbreaks by using the most effective way which is torture to ensure that the safety and lives of Americans is not threatened. Through the use of torture by our military, the U.S. has been able to interfere the use of terrorism, obtain important information and save numbers of U.S. citizens lives.
The use of torture has always been a hot topic of moral and ethical discussion. Typically, the discussion is not about whether or not torture is good, but rather if there is ever a morally acceptable situation in which torture should be allowed to occur. Does a criminal’s deeds strip him of basic human rights and make it morally okay for him to be physically and mentally abused? Do certain situations such as war make torture acceptable? It is generally agreed upon that torture is a terrible violation of a person and their rights; the common thread among moral questions such as these is if there are any times when torture could be considered morally acceptable. In order to analyze this moral dilemma, an ethical system is commonly used as a
Torture is the process of inflicting pain upon other people in order to force them to say something against their own will. The word “torture” comes from the Latin word “torquere,” which means to twist. Torture can not only be psychologically but mentally painful. Before the Enlightenment, it was perfectly legal to torture individuals but nowadays, it is illegal to torture anyone under any circumstances. In this essay, I will demonstrate why torture should never acceptable, not matter the condition.