The Instigator
Volcanoes13
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mysterious_Stranger
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

Torturing Terrorists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Mysterious_Stranger
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/5/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,997 times Debate No: 38525
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

Volcanoes13

Con

Do you really think torturing terrorists is the most efficient way of gaining information? Terrorists are taught to hate Americans, they are brainwashed into thinking that we are evil and we need to die. It would be a very ineffective strategy to torture the terrorist, because that would cause even more hatred toward us. If we torture the terrorist, it will cause the terrorist to feel even more rebellious against us. Why would we want to do that.
The right reproach to get information from a terrorist is to be compassionate and loving toward them. Buy them food, ask them questions, and be nice to them. This will cause the brainwashed terrorist to realize we Americans aren't evil, blood hungry, mean people. People have tried this strategy before, and it has been successful. Because it will only make the terrorists more hateful if we attempt to torture them into submission!
Mysterious_Stranger

Pro

Here are my arguments for round one:

To ensure the safety of the public: If say the government have discovered the location of a bomb which will go off in a public area in a matter of hours and also have captured a suspect that they have significant evidence against, they will interrogate him, however if this does not work then they may have to resort to torture as a means of getting evidence from the suspect, if they refuse to use torture as a means of interrogation then they would be putting innocent lives in danger. In a bomb scare scenario the benefits of torturing him would out-weight the costs of it.

It would reveal more terror operations sooner: If all other means of interrogation have failed, then torture could be the only way to gain information on future terror attacks, and by gaining more information the government could stop future attacks and detain more suspects. Torture would be a quicker way to gain this information as opposed to fair treatment.

Sources:
http://securingliberty.idebate.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Volcanoes13

Con

Yes, however, even then it will most likely cause the terrorist to be opposed to telling the truth. If you really think about it, torturing the victim into submission is only going to make them more hateful and opposed to telling the truth because of what they are brainwashed into thinking. I do not think that torture is ever the right way to make someone tell the truth, if anything, it will cause them to hate even more. It is most likely more efficient to use techniques such as showing how much pain the terrorist causes on the individuals, and how the people he hates is capable of loving and showing compassion. Because remember, terrorists are taught that we are evil people who want to kill them, so they must kill us first. To torture them into submission will only give them evidence of that being true about us, thus making it unlikely for them to give into it. I don't think we are risking innocent lives by not torturing the suspect. For I think it is more likely for terrorists to submit to us if we prove them wrong about us being evil. Some interrogation experts agree that interrogation by means of force and torturing does not work.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
Mysterious_Stranger

Pro

I shall continue.

The Geneva conventions allow it: The Geneva Conventions only apply to prisoners of war. They do not apply to spies or terrorists. The Convention Against Torture only applies on a country's own ground, which is why torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay is legal.

Terrorism has become a greater threat:It is the in the nature of terrorism to be fast, high impact and difficult to detect. International tensions caused by Western involvement in the Middle East and other causes are likely to rise. It is reasonable to assume that terrorist activity will continue or increase as well. Add to this that weapons are easier to acquire, to make for yourself than ever before and these extra measures seem justified in the process to protect a country from terrorism, or trying to eradicate terrorism altogether.

Torture acts as a deterrent to others: Physical and painful consequences of one's actions are a larger deterrent than imprisonment, because of the relative safety and well being one can have in prison compared to the pain felt in torture. Fear is often used successfully as a motivator: for example, children were forced to become soldiers for rebel armies in Sierra Leone. If fear is so effective, it can equally be used as a deterrent.

Sources:
http://securingliberty.idebate.org...
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by The_Serb 3 years ago
The_Serb
I must agree with PRO Mysterious_Stranger that torture is moral and warranted in some extreme situations during wartime. Do either of you know how this was carried out?
Posted by LayTheologian 3 years ago
LayTheologian
In addition to being inhumane, torture has been shown to be horribly ineffective for gathering information.
Posted by EvanCraft 3 years ago
EvanCraft
No it's inhumane and wrong in every way possible.
Posted by EvanCraft 3 years ago
EvanCraft
No it's inhumane and wrong in every way possible.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
Volcanoes13Mysterious_StrangerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Whilst I abhor torture, Pro's arguments were more complete and soundly founded. I vote Pro, though I sympathize with Con. Side note: The Geneva argument was good, though I'm not certain I would buy that interpretation...
Vote Placed by NiqashMotawadi3 3 years ago
NiqashMotawadi3
Volcanoes13Mysterious_StrangerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were very weak to the point that I thought he was trolling when he said that we should by terrorists food and be friendly with them so that they don't hate us. Con presented better refutations and showed how torture is an effective method in critical situations. However, he didn't convince me why there can't be any better measures. Anyhow, Arguments goes for Pro for having better arguments and refutations.
Vote Placed by Juris 3 years ago
Juris
Volcanoes13Mysterious_StrangerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: In time bomb ticking scenario given by PRO, the best solution is torturing the terrorist not as what CON said about loving and being compassionate with them. I can't grasp the idea of loving them so that they tell where the bomb is. That would be very unlikely to happen. I vote for PRO for his time bomb ticking scenario as why torture whether or not it is 100% effective, still the most practical thing to do. Not Con's idea of loving as it is very vague.