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…
serious federal cases (Boot 2018). After the bombing on 9/11 the world was in grave—and understandable—fear of foreigners and potential terrorists, as a result the years following consisted of George W.
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
methods. There are many forms of torture used in foreign interrogations, Trump’s ideal method is that of “waterboarding,” this is the process of suffocation by water involving strapping the individual to a tilted board with their legs above their head. A cloth is placed over their face, covering their nose and mouth and water is then poured continuously over the cloth to prevent breathing, simulate drowning and induce panic (Laughland 2015). The process is often repeated in 40 second intervals. This method has shown to be very uncommon—the U.S. government has only officially acknowledged waterboarding on three detainees: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times, Zubaydah 83 times, and al-Nashiri twice (HRW 2015). Of course this is not the only form, and evidently not the most used one. Obviously the use of physical harm and life threatening beatings is one of the most common as it can be something as little as grasping the detained by their face. There’s stress positions and forced nudity, this often involving being chained to walls and contorted into painful positions for hours on end. Personalized threats are another one—threats upon family, threats to the person themself, and blackmail are common in interrogation. Sleep deprivation with the use of loud noise for days on end along with deprivation of food and fluids are a form of torture used on detainees (HRW 2015). Confinement was approved by the Bush administration in the case of Abu Zubaydah in 2002 (Laughland 2015). And why is this knowledge important? Even though EO 13491 explicitly states that torture is illegal, it has continued. A controversial example of this being at a U.S. military-run prison in the Guantanamo Bay. In 2017 it was founded that an alleged conspirator of the 9/11 bombings—Ammar al-Baluchi—continued to be subjected to practices that constitute torture. The major forms being used against him have been; sleep deprivation, isolation, and confinement. After years of living under these circumstances he’s shown signs of several mental conditions with absolutely no proper treatment or relief (Haltiwanger 2017). In 2017 there was 41 men being held in the prison with 26 of them never actually having charges pressed on them and five being cleared for release yet still being detained which raises suspicion as to what goes on behind the walls. Torture has had a long history in the U.S. and although there have been brief periods of time when it seemed efficient that doesn’t cover for how unethical the concept really is. Violation of EO 13491 is listed among the most serious international crimes, including crimes against humanity and war crimes—not only that but it is literally illegal in the moment. U.S. operatives have killed several detainees during interrogation and there has been proof of psychological and physical damage to those held captive within certain detention centers and prisons. During his presidential campaign, Trump said he wanted to “load up” Guantanamo Bay “with some bad dudes” and has pushed to expand the detention center since entering the White House. Therefore, after several years of what was believed to be a “torture-free” government there may be big changes with just a few movements in congress and that seems very unethical and morally incorrect.
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.
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.
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
Because of the 9/11 terrorist, the U.S. have been able to limit the outcomes they produce by using physical and mental torture against their emotional torture they used on the Citizens. Its not the U.S. that started this battle over the use of torture, america had to protect itself from further hurt. “The suffering caused by the terrorists is the real torture (Jean-Marie Le Pen).” people argue that torture it is an inhumane act to deliberately beat a victim physically and mentally. The problem is that there are no other possible solutions to obtain information that are as effective as torture on such events other than force it out of them by using torture as their primary weapon (The Legal Prohibition). If the U.S. wants to pursue the safety of americans they have to take actions, As long as there are no bombs going off around the world, the U.S. will continue to use torture . Terrorism has become a much greater threat than before. regardless if the beating are too extreme, it is still the duty of the state to protect its citizens (Torture Is Just Means). Even if the interoges are suffering from severe torture, the U.S. is able t...
The notion that fear will make a human leak information is not a novel idea. Torture has widely been used throughout the world by many groups of people. After World War II, The Geneva Convention prohibited any nation from partaking in torture. The emergence of terrorist activity on American soil brought up the question whether torture should be advocated or prohibited from a moral standpoint. The US changed the definition of torture in order to forcibly attain potentially important information from captives. Even though the new clause suggested that many of the methods the US used were now legal, other countries still had an issue in terms of honoring the Geneva Convention and basic human rights. Advocates for torture promise that countless innocent lives can be saved from the information obtained from a single torture victim. Opponents to the advocates suggest that torture often results in misleading information. Morally, torture is not justified as it degrades humans and often leaves victims scarred for life and possibly dead.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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...
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
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.