Is torture ever justified?
I oppose torture in any form under any circumstance because it is inhumane and the information gathered is unreliable.
Torture should never be used for any reason. In the United States, we are not allowed to torture suspects in domestic crimes, so if we except these standards for ourselves, why should it be any different for our treatment of enemy combatants? In addition, I've head many experts familiar with interrogation techniques simply say: torture does not work. The information gathered is questionable at best. Therefore, let's not lower our human rights standards, especially when the results are unreliable, but more importantly inhumane.
Posted by: WackyDelSometimes there is no other way.
If the person you are torturing is part of an organization that is harming an american and other methods have tried and failed, who is more important, the criminal, or the innocent american?
Posted by: rogueOf course.
I am neither brainwashed nor do I have no idea what I am supportive of. I think physical and psychological torture are acceptable ways of getting anything that you want and/or need. People need to look at the big picture. If your (child, pet, mother, father, etc.) was abducted, and hidden, and the man won't tell you where she was hidden, you would, well, probably torture him for the information, would you not?
Posted by: ag18078Deserved.
I don't think torture should ever be put lightly. But some people in this world do need it. Who here would say that if they were in a room with Hitler tied to a chair, you wouldn't get a bit violent with him. Also, for people like the parents of the poor 5 year old girl who was kidnapped in England recently. The suspect we have cannot be tortured, but by using some, I believe that child could be saved far quicker, if at all.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, because people will say anything to get the torture to stop, rendering it useless.
Questioning or interrogating someone while torturing them is not likely to result in useful information. People will say anything, or admit to anything, to avoid being tortured. In some countries with oppressive governments, people will accuse innocent people of criminal activity to save themselves, and innocent people are tortured until they admit to things they didn't do, and punished as scapegoats. Torture is cruel and useless.
Posted by: N Schroeder 60Advanced Interrogation Technique
Torture is an "advanced interrogation technique" that is far more effective than other interrogation techniques. Information is easily retrieved from individuals through torture. Therefore in this case, it can be justified.
As a form of judicial punishment, torture serves the purpose well. Torture is mentally captivating for both the observer and the sufferer. As the observer would understand the consequences of disobedience and the sufferer would understand the extent of which the power of the state has over him/her. The pain of the torture will also teach the sufferer a lesson that they should have obeyed authority. Everybody learns from this, therefore society becomes a better place.
The argument that torture is inhumane or cruel is laughable. Ethics and morality is subjective. Different people will have different definitions of morality. We should not look at the justifiability of torture based on our emotions but rather on the "net benefits" gained from torture. E.g. information retrieved from interrogation. Torture is way more effective that other interrogation techniques with the exception of use of leverages. E.g. threatening to rape/kill their wife and kids if they don't cooperate.
If the information extracted is incorrect, then you will have to torture them further or kill some members of their family as a demonstration of your power. If they have no further information to give, then judging by his/her crimes, the appropriate punishment shall be installed for them.Posted by: TitusYes most definitely.
I can see both sides to this argument however I lean towards supporting torture under some circumstances. Such circumstances would mainly be in order to save or preserve the larger (numbers wise) community/society. For instance, imagine a nuclear device in a major city that a person in custody could "potentially" know something about. Any amount of accurate information is valuable no matter the cost. But, how do you ensure the accuracy of the information? It's fair to say no-one can know, for certain, what someone is thinking or what they know exactly or even if they are telling the exact truth. This unfortunately leads to uncertainty as to whether useful, accurate information can be extracted. A more useful question lies in where does the level of certainty need to lie before someone has the "justification" to torture for information - and only then, how do they ensure the accuracy of information?
Posted by: AnonymousYes, In some cases it can save lives.
Torture can be justified if it will save a lot of people. If a thousand people are going to be killed and the only way that you can prevent them from getting killed is to torture one person then I do believe that torture is morally right. So, in some cases torture can be justified, but it isn't always right.
Posted by: AnonymousWell of course it's acceptable,
Finding another way of extracting information is good and all, but imagine if you're on a time constraint. Do you really think that, say, a terrorist will crack, who have already lost their humanity in my book, by anything other than extreme physical pain? If so than you are deluded, in my opinion.
Posted by: RandWhen people are in intermittent danger
So, from a legal point of view, under no circumstances is torturing that man acceptable. In doing so, you would be breaching the agreement, and be subject to a trial. However, from a moral side of view, which is the one most people would come from, if you tortured the man, and he revealed the locations of the bombs, and you could clear the areas before they went off, surely the fact that both he and everyone that was in danger has survived, this is better that all those people dying?
Posted by: ed.ballLWhy Not Torture?
What is wrong with torture? Is it worse than capital punishment? Why can we not let someone suffer after what they may have made individuals suffer? After an action there is a reaction, that reaction may not be good sometimes and you just have to bear through it. No one said life was easy and no one said that we all have to be humane. Is it humane for a man/woman to brutally slaughter people? Is it humane for them to live in a jail sell rather than feeling the pain that they inflicted on others unto themselves? With everything good or bad there is always a opposite to it. Like love of course you want to be loved, but is there not a fear of losing love or never really having love at all. Why should one be killed rather than having the painful memories and total agony to remember that the pain they have inflicted can be inflicted upon them. I am not saying we use torture for just any reason here. I mean to those that have killed a number of people. Like say in 9/11 if the terrorist lived why not torture him, why not find out who he was working for? He killed hundreds with his pals so he should be reminded of the pain he brought to all the families by being beaten and put through suffrage. If they killed for no reason and were all ready dead on the inside why not torture them to know what true pain and horror is rather than killing their outer shell.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is self defense.
If police are willing to shoot a criminal to save civilians, and murderers are executed to prevent more murders, why can we not commit a lesser evil for a far greater good? What's worse: the tough interrogation of a terrorist, or the mass murder of men, women, and children? It is imperative we put the safety of the nation before the constitutional rights of a single criminal. Is torture against the constitution? Probably. But if we don't make sacrifices and torture terrorists for information, there won't be a constitution to protect.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture will be helpful
Torture is justified because it can give us info and they deserve it. I may be young but I know that torture is being used right now even though our bill of rights tells us no cruel and unusual punishment. We still do it and most people that it happens to deserve it.
Posted by: KobiashiaTorture is justified.
Torture is justified when the person who gives torture to someone else receives the same torture they gave that person. Unless the person who is giving the torture to that other person has been tortured by that person that they are torturing in this case the person that gave the torture to the person who is getting revenge on that person cannot get that person back.
Posted by: AnonymousIn some cases, torture can be justified if it serves a greater purpose.
If someone is about to bomb a place, and one person has information that can stop that bombing, saving millions of lives, then torture in order to extract that information is justified. Hurting one person can save millions. If the U.S. had a person that knew about the 911 situation before it happened, then we could have gone out of our way to find that information and stop the tragedy from ever happening.
Posted by: AnonymousNet-benefit
In SOME situations torture is beneficial. It's simple utilitarian logic: if torturing one person saves 100, 50, 10, hell even 2 people from dying, the act was a beneficial act.
Posted by: ZaradiYes, In military cases.
When it comes to the military, we need to give them what they require to preform the job to their fullest. If they honestly think that torture can help them get information and make their job easier, then yes, it is justifiable. It is the military, and sometimes you have to work with the devil and be a little immoral to make people safe.
Posted by: jzonda415The Safety of many lives far outweighs the 'rights' of terrorist and criminal suspects.
In order for a government to protect it's people at all costs, certain and more extreme methods must be used if the suspect refuses to co-operate. When someone can be identified as a plausible suspect for a crime, particularly a threat to national security, then I firmly believe that they should be stripped of all so-called human rights. It is not just acceptable to force the truth from national dangers but it is a duty.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is justified.
I believe torture is justified and is used as a way of getting vital information out of someone like a terrorist. Say if someone you love has been kidnapped and you caught one of them torture would get him to tell you what you want if he doesn't talk. Thank you.
Posted by: AnonymousNet-benefit.
If torturing a terrorist saves 20 innocent lives, by all means it is justified. It's a question of what's at stake. Of course though, it should only be used under extreme circumstances.
Posted by: phantomWithholding vital information.
In a situation where an individual is captured who may work as part of a larger cell or organization that is a known threat, military or terror, the individual is likely to have been trained to decline to give any information. With a military type, no amount of words are going to convince them otherwise and the only option then would be to make threats, but what can you threaten them with if not pain through torture? With terrorism in particular, if there is a known connection to them and a terror organization then why should human rights protect the terrorists secrets rather than gain information pertaining to the whereabouts of their training facilities, safe houses and targets?
Posted by: BlacklisthunterYes, of course torture is justified.
What if you, your family, or a mass population of you country would die due a terrorist attack. Osama Bin Laden was found with the help of information obtained from torture. Also, if a US official, especially one who specializes in torture, goes takes the time and effort to detain you, you have done something bad enough that torture would be justified as a life long punishment for what you did.
Posted by: Anonymousmost def.
What if a terrorist captured your family and took them to a secret location? Like the bomb scenario, the authorities have managed to capture one of the terrorists but he won't give up the location. Would you have any qualms about using torture to extract the information, even if that information might be faulty?
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is justified if the crime committed is sufficient enough to deserve physical punishment
There are only a few cases where torture can be justified but these deserve physical punishment nonetheless. For example if someone has been proven to commit a murder but refuses to give up any accomplices then torture is justified. The other perpetrators have to be brought to justice and the murder has taken someone's life so torture is justified.
Posted by: J Navarro 62Balanced Response
I can see both sides to this argument however lean towards supporting torture under some circumstances. Such circumstances would mainly be in order to save or preserve the larger (numbers wise) community/society. For instance, imagine a nuclear device in a major city that a person in custody could "potentially" know something about. Any amount of accurate information is valuable no matter the cost. But, how do you ensure the accuracy of the information? It's fair to say no-one can know, for certain, what someone is thinking or what they know exactly or even if they are telling the exact truth. This unfortunately leads to uncertainty as to whether useful, accurate information can be extracted. A more useful question lies in where does the level of certainty need to lie before someone has the "justification" to torture for information - and only then, how do they ensure the accuracy of information?
Posted by: AnonymousI agree that torture definitely has an appropriate time. It could prevent future attacks on American Citizens.
I feel that we ought not allow terrorists "civil liberties or rights". Just the though is absurd and disgusting to me. In these circumstances where someone, foreign or domestic, chooses to make a deliberate attempt to take the a person or people's right to life. Torture ought to be a standby to get information quickly needed to possibly prevent any further attacks. The fact that some people even think about standing up for these people's "rights" is sick, twisted, and backwards,
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is acceptable in dire circumstances.
I think that if it benefits more people than it will hurt (for instance the military tortures one man to save hundreds) then it is okay. It's better that one man dies than a whole big group of people, don't you think? The life of one bad guy isn't as valuable as 100 good people's lives.
Posted by: AnonymousALWAYS, no. Sometimes, of course
Torture can be justified under some circumstances (albeit, only a few)
Posted by: imabenchI think that torture can serve as a vital tool during war to extract critical information from enemies.
There are many situations where torture doesn't work, however, in certain situations it has provided valuable information. If an enemy soldier is captured with knowledge of troop movements or decoding information they will not likely give up that information willingly. Torture in this situation, while inhumane, will potentially save thousands of lives. While not completely reliable once there is a direction and some information it can be verified.
Posted by: FabulousLucius90In today's world, torture is justified in many cases.
The use of torture is a very important tool in warfare. If it takes torturing 100 enemies to save the life of one U.S. citizen, then I do feel it is justified. The terrorists are aware that, if captured, they will certainly face some form of torture, yet they continue their plans to kill innocent people. I believe torture should be available for both foreign and domestic terrorists, and anyone who chooses to be a part of killing innocent men, women and children forfeits their human rights.
Posted by: ClosedUlysses75Under certain circumstances
If there is irrefutable evidence that the person is involved in criminal activity that directly puts the life of other innocent citizens at risk, and the current legal interrogation methods do not produce positive results on time or at all. Then and only then will torture be necessary and justified.
Posted by: andre02You won't make terrorists talk with ponies and butterflies.
Terrorists are willing to blow themselves up to achieve their goal, nothing less than torture will make them talk. Someone who is willing to die for his cause isn't going to talk with being forced to through immense pain... People need to stop looking at things like it's a perfect world where you don't have to do stuff like this.
Posted by: donald.kellerTerrorist with time-restrained information
The ticking time-bomb scenario.
You are a chief investigator of CIA (or whatever), there is a bomb somewhere that you know is going to go off very soon due to prior investigation. The man, or woman, in front of you is the only one with sufficient information to save the world. You know they have been trained never, ever to give away information and that they fear the torture back home worse than yours.
Then you have to torture them because threats alone will never do it.Posted by: ConnoisseurWhen did torture become such a bad word?
I understand that torture is ugly, you get no argument from me there. But, when did it become such a bad word that even talking about it as a method to save lives makes you animal? Torture, in the sense that it is a horrible act, in essence is what makes it such a useful tool. I say the animals are the people that would not do anything at their disposal to protect the innocent in the name of misguided "holier than thow" principles. Because only an animal can see the potential dangers that today's society presents and continue to live as though it is a fantasy...
Posted by: AnonymousAbsolutely
Terrorists would torture and kill you. They should be shown the same courtesy they're not people they're trash. Do what must be done and dispose of them. Innocent lives can be saved they are not innocent lives. They take innocent lives and do not deserve to be treated humanly.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is easily justified in theory but not in day to day application.
There are moral arguments for torture, for example if you know with certainty that many people will die unless you torture one person. The problems with torture are the unknowns, how does one know if the information is true and not given under duress. The biggest problem with torture is that it is not efficient or reliable. Torture also cannot be practiced without abuse and ruinous side effects to the legal system and morale.
Posted by: CarMjYes, in extreme instances.
If torture saves innocent lives, like those of 9/11, I believe harsh interrogation is justifiable. Think of all those who lost their loved ones on that horrendous day. Do you think that if "torture" saved their loved ones life that day they'd be for it? Of course they would, because it saved 2 lives, their loved ones life and the perpetrators life.
War is ugly. Terrorism is ugly. Crime against one another is ugly. The world we live in is full of sinful people who have no regard for life. How then do we as law abiding peaceful people protect our families and loved ones from those who would choose to do harm to us? We have to have a means in which we can safetly protect those who are innocent. If "torture" or harsh interrogations are the way to do it, then it must be done but only in extreme instances.Posted by: AnonymousThe Moral Debate/Threat that Torture Poses Towards ones Human Rights will be Sidelined if Innocent Civilians are at Risk of Violence or Terror.
- A citizen has made a consciences decision to harm others. If that person has information which could prevent a catastrophic act of terrorism or violence on a civilian population, torture is justified.
- Although states have an obligation to protect and uphold Human Rights they also have a duty to protect their citizens. Human Rights can and will be sidelined if there is a threat to the greater population.
- The argument that, ''we must be better than our enemies,'' is flawed. One must fight fire with fire. Those who have chosen to break laws and infringe on others Human Rights as outlined in the Universal Deceleration, must be held to account to prevent future actions of violence.Posted by: AnonymousFire with fire.
Do you think that if terrorist were to capture your family, they wouldn't torture them? The Taliban, Al Qaeda, extremist, are all individuals who do not care for human rights or life. These individuals don't care if they have to chop off your fingers in order to get what they want. People need to understand that we're dealing with bad people, who have bad intentions. People say that if the US tortures individuals, we're as bad as they are? Who ever said that we had to be the good guys in the first place? This world is full of people that care about one thing, and one thing only: take human life. People say that it is against human rights, it is not morally right, and ethically wrong. Let me ask you this: Name me one group of terrorist that has ever cared about rights, morals, and human ethics. Please do.
Posted by: AnonymousYes. And here's why..
Morality, for me, is based on minimizing human suffering. If you have the opportunity to save many lives, at the cost of torturing one person who may be responsible, I think it is justified. Lot's of people seem to use a 'torture should not be done because torture is bad' argument, or similarly 'God does like torture'. These people need to think one step further, and ask 'would God prefer one man to suffer, or many to die?'. I personally do not believe in the jealous abrahamic sky-god (or any interventionist God for that matter), and this is largely because of the way it inhibits critical thinking on issues pertaining to morality. Morality is not about pleasing a celestial dictator. It is about thinking critically about your beliefs and actions, as to minimize human suffering.
Posted by: AnonymousUnder certain circumstances
If there is irrefutable evidence that the person is involved in criminal activity that directly puts the life of other innocent citizens at risk, and the current legal interrogation methods do not produce positive results in time or at all. Then and only then will torture be necessary and justified.
Posted by: AnonymousIn Specific Cases
I believe that in specific cases, torture should be justifiable. National security is of the highest importance to any country and when this is threatened, members of special services will feel the need to use methods of torture. In the 21st Century, torture has become much more humane, there are no cases now of people being hung upside down and hacked to pieces... methods are much more psychological. Sensory isolation, which simply relies on the weakness of the human brain is being used more and more. So if government agencies can use methods such as these to retrieve information from terrorists who might put the lives of many people in danger then torturing them to find information, or prevent it from happening may be the lesser of two evils, and provide an outcome that is for the greater good.
Posted by: AnonymousSometimes.
Only if it is the ONLY way to get information that could potentially save millions. But that is subjective, as you never know if people will lie.
Posted by: TUFI think torture can be justified in certain situations where an innocent is in danger.
I think torture can be justified in situations where someone is in danger. The person who has the information, the suspect, can be tortured in order to find the person in danger. The suspect should not hold such information and allow someone to be possibly hurt or killed. Torture may help the person in danger find safety.
Posted by: FemaleTyron73Yes, torture is justified
You have to look at the situation without emotion. Yes, torture is wrong, but it will save innumerable lives if done. Sure it isn't always accurate, but it gets results much faster than other methods, and much more effective. Say that you have an hour to save innumerable civilians, and the perpetrator isn't talking. What are you going to do? Torture, both physical and psychological, has been around for thousands of years, and we still haven't found anything more effective
Posted by: AnonymousTorture can, at times, be justified, such as in the case of enemy combatants who may know about future terrorist plots.
Torture can be justified. After 9/11, some terrorists, that were caught that weren't able to carry out their deeds, were tortured with water boarding, and other methods, and this did yield some information. If it will get us information that could save hundreds of lives, torture can be acceptable.
Posted by: PeriodicPatrick28Torture for a greater good.
If the torture brings about saving more lives then i believe it is justified.
Posted by: TrikstarikIf torturing a sociopath will get information to save a law-abiding citizen from death it is justifiable.
There is such a debate about torture. I cannot even begin to fathom the pain endured by those who were being tortured. Say for a moment the following contains no errors: Your daughter is being held by a sociopath who will kill her, and the sociopath's partner was captured by you. You can either let your daughter die, or torture the partner to get the location of your daughter. You've exhausted all other means of getting the information. Would you do it?
Posted by: Z Fryeas a deterrent yes..
I dont know coming from a normal human being living in society i know you have had the thought cross your mind of killing someone but if the sentence instead of spending life in prison was just a year of getting tortured i promise that you would rethink killing someone
Posted by: AnonymousYes! Pain can be used succesfully as an interogaion tool
The application of small amount of pain, with the possibility of higher levels of pain, can and does help to break a prisoner's will to resist.
I don't want to see pain or the threat of pain used as a punishment, but used as one of many tools that an interrogator may apply to get reliable information from an unlawful enemy combatant.
An interrogator should use any and all techniques to get a detainee to tell the truth.
Give them a cigarette, good food, become their pal...If they lie to you, into the light box, give them a little electrical motivation, or water boarding, nothing that is permanent just momentary pain and leave it open for more.
Break them mentally to get the information, but keep the physical stuff to a minimum and use it sparingly. But get the information as quick as possible as reliable as possible.
Our enemies fight with no rules and laugh at our hand wringing. We need to become more ruthless and gain their respect or fear. Either will work as long as they leave our citizens alone.Posted by: AnonymousYes it is
If it comes down to protecting the lives of innocent people, then yes, I do support torture.
Posted by: EvanKTorture is a justifiable cause
Family is one reason you would ever torture somebody. If some terrorist or lunatic kidnaps your wife or your child and you caught them, what would be the logical thing to do.......Torture them. Especially if they dont talk. If it were me I would do anything to get my wife or child or anybody I loved that they kidnapped back. All I'm saying is torture can be a justifiable cause.
Posted by: BVBArmyThey would do the same to you.
The people who are justifiably tortured would do the same to you. The people who are justifiably tortured are going to be terrorists or anyone that knows something that could save a lot of people. If you could save a lot of people and just have to torture one bad guy to do it, of course it's okay.
Posted by: AnonymousI must say that I would.
Torture would not be my 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd choice to get information out of someone, but if the people I loved were in danger. I would barely hesitate. If my mom, dad, brothers, friends, girlfriend, or most other people were put in danger and I needed to get them out. I might torture. Straight fact of life.
Posted by: justin.gravesWhen American lives can be saved as a result.
Basically terrorists have been torturing American soldiers as far back as I can remember. If they are not following the rules why should we then have to?. That puts us at a very unfair advantage. If American lives can be saved by using some form of "torture", and im not talking about cutting fingers off or anthign drastic like that, then it should most definitely be allowed. Osama Bin Laden was killed in direct corellation to information that was obtained during a interrogation in Guantanamo Bay which almost certainly were using those techniques. This is the reason why these people do this shit, the think America is soft because of all the liberal pussies out there.
Posted by: cooper2729Torture is justified, life imprisonment is not sufficient, execution can also let off too easy.
Torture can be justified if and only if it is conflicted upon those who physically and emotionally torture others. Standing behind the saying 'an eye for an eye', it is important for these individuals to be able to experience the pain and suffering they put someone else through intentionally. Torture is not an act that someone can do and pass along as an attempt that was unintended. Once they get a taste of their own medicine can justice be done to their victims. Imprisonment means nothing in serving punishment for something severe like this and execution would put too quick of an end to the price they should be paying for hurting others.
Posted by: MyHierProtects Our Nation
Our nation needs to be protected. There are people in this world who hate Americans, and they will try to hurt our country. Our nation needs to feel safe, and do you think that terrorists plotting against our country don't deserve torture? Also, some people deserve it. Some people have done bad enough things to the point where they deserve the pain.
Posted by: AnonymousIt's the best possible option when given time constraints.
Most people would not consider torture to be their first form of defense when interrogating a suspect that has allegedly planted a bomb. But if the bomb is going to kill a thousand lives, this criminal should not be given the same human rights as the rest of us. HE CHOSE TO BOMB US. We need to do everything possible to save these lives. When people are hired as police officers they pledge to all Americans that they will do everything in their power to save them. I'm not saying lets go around torturing everybody, but I don't think we should ever rule it out.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture saves lives.
Although some people may say that torture is wrong and inhumane, in reality it saves lives and protects innocent people from deadly terrorist attacks. When someone who is a terrorist gets tortured for a short amount of time, we are able to get valuable information about battle tactics and thus save the lives of innocent people. All of this comes at the cost of one terrorist being tortured.
Posted by: AnonymousIf your country is in danger.
If your country is in danger and you have someone in custody that you know knows something, and it's the only way to get information out of him, it is better to torture one man and save millions of lives. For example if we had a man in custody the week before 9/11, it would have saved all those lives.
Posted by: AnonymousFamily
What if a terrorist captured your family and took them to a secret location? Like the bomb scenario, the authorities have managed to capture one of the terrorists but he won't give up the location. Would you have any qualms about using torture to extract the information, even if that information might be faulty?
Posted by: AnonymousI believe in certain circumstances torture is justified.
I believe in certain circumstances torturing is justified. In America we have given softer prison sentences to individuals who have done some of the most disgusting crimes. When they get out of prison, nearly all criminals at something will make it back to our prisons. Torturing would help decrease the crime rate by making criminals not want to get into trouble again. We are too easy on our fellow prisoners.
Posted by: RaouICyberMost definitely.
In many cases where there are hostages or in very drastic terrorist cases, torture is needed in order to save more lives from these horrible men. If torture could save lives, then it is beneficial and logical to use torture. If you were a parent of a victim in the recent Connecticut shooting, wouldn't you wish to find these people and make sure they didn't have a group working with them or an employer? This is how it is in all cases and it definitely plays with people's since of morality.
Posted by: AnonymousTo save many lives, it is justified to cause one person pain.
If I knew that I could save the lives of tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more, I would definitely consider it worth causing someone pain to get the information necessary to save those lives. I do not believe that there is ever any other reason that justifies torture besides the saving of innocent lives, though.
Posted by: MariaRYes because torture gets you answers.
If you torture someone for information they will eventually tell you what you need to know. People will say that it doesn't get you accurate information, but if they tell you something that is false then you keep torturing them until they tell you what you need to know. This proves torture gets you answers.
Posted by: AnonymousJust a side note
While agreeing with many of the arguments for the use of torture, as a UK citizen it feels like many Americans feel that the term 'US citizen' connotes a sense of higher being. Just a fabricated example but when I see comments saying "torturing a terrorist can save an American life" it really annoys me. 'Innocent life' would serve the purpose just as well. It's not only Americans who are in danger from terrorism. The phrases 'saves a US citizen' irritates me further since US citizenship is being revered here as something to be praised and protected. What if someone who wasn't a US citizen was in danger? I'm definitely not saying they wouldn't be protected to the same extent, but you couldn't use the 'save a US citizen' phrase in your argument any more and I feel it wouldn't convince people in the same way that mentioning their citizenship attempts to. Just a thought.
Posted by: AnonymousIn some cases it is necessary.
If some one had information pertaining the a bomb that would kill thousands of innocent people, you would want to know about it. If they were not willing to give it up then torture would be necessary I know it is grim but is one life worth as many as thousands of lives. It is a tough call, but torture can be justified in some situations.
Posted by: C0rn4Gamer
I do not think that torture is ever justified it is cruel and inhuman, it shows no humanity.
I do not believe in torture I feel it is not a necessary. I don't feel that criminals or anyone being tortured feels any remorse for what they have done. There is just the pain of the moment. It is not true justice it breeds hatred and contempt for the punisher. Only people that have no compassion makes torturing apart of their punishment practices.
Posted by: C0ImEIiteYou don't have the right
EVEN if someone deserved to be tortured, which many who are illegally tortured do not, nobody has the right to deliberately harm another human being with the intention of causing the maximum physical and emotional pain. That is the most twisted, sadistic, cruel behavior imaginable and it is as inhumane as our rivals. A popular "YES" commentator had the audacity to state: "Give them a little electrical motivation, or water boarding, nothing that is permanent just momentary pain…" ARE YOU INSANE. Waterboarding means literally drowning someone to death and then bringing them back to life a moment later. You are physiologically drowning them over and over and over again, killing them over and over and over again, and this is not only physically traumatizing but emotionally destroying. It is one of the most extreme forms of torture known. Before you make uneducated claims trivializing the cruelty, sadism and inhumane treatment you support, at least try to even vaguely comprehend the magnitude of its impact on the human body and psyche. Torture is the ULTIMATE violation of another human being's basic human rights, and nothing and nobody has the right to violate them. Thus torture is unacceptable in any case. Our enemies may laugh at our hand wringing, but it is the very inhumanity and chaos, the inability to use diplomacy and appreciate peace, that we disdain in them and struggle against when it is directed towards us and the innocent among them. Becoming "more ruthless" will just antagonize them further or encourage them to compete. As a nation we have to set a role model of humanity and respect of everyone's equal rights.
Posted by: GolemNever
Imagine torture being legally implemented? Giving the State the right to torture a HUMAN BEING is a) Unconstitutional b) Ethically/Morally wrong c) Impractical d) Archaic c) Dangerous. Firstly, how can reliable intelligence ever be gained from torture? By Evolution, in it in our very nature as humans to shy away from pain. The victim will tell anyone willing to listen anything they want to hear to make it stop. They are not concerned with giving accurate information. Secondly, while torture remains illegal, any so-called evidence gained cannot be used in court. Thirdly, by permitting torture in one case i.e. terrorism, you're setting a precedent. Do we want a torture culture? For example, low-ranking soldiers tortured for sport in grotesque ways in Abu Ghraib prison, in Iraq. This leads me to another point- do we really want to countries such as the USA, one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world, the right to torture for information? Despite there being too numerous reasons for forbidding torture, both practical and moral, for me it all comes down to this. I don't want to be tortured and I don't want others to be tortured in the name of ideologies like "the greater good", or "the ends justify the means". No amount of lives saved is worth our humanity.
Posted by: DannioWe are not animals, but human beings with logic and a complex brain.
How can certain countries be considered as barbaric when all countries implement torture? Look at the United States, they consider themselves as a "civil" country when they set up Guantanamo Bay and tortured prisoners (some coming out to be completely innocent). Waterboarding, drowning, sleep deprivation, humiliation, sexual abuse, and burnings have occurred there. Yet they consider themselves as civil human beings. It is so sad to see people in the world be convinced that the leaders actually care about them as their heads fill up with ideologies with minimal to no truth in them. This world is so corrupt and I really get upset seeing people believing the things they hear in the media. No one knows how to think for themselves anymore.
Posted by: AnonymousWho are we
to torture torturers? What does that make us? Just monsters on the other side of the table.
Posted by: bossyburritoJust, no...
Torture brings about unreliable information (for instance, two men being tortured in Guantanamo Bay confessed to being two men in a video featuring Osama bin Laden; after confessing, they were proven to be innocent) which destroys the likelihood of it saving more lives than not.
Posted by: adontimasuBarbaric and doesn't work
Not only is torture barbaric in and of itself, it has never worked. Victims merely give as many lies as they can to end it. Also torturing enemy POWs would seem to give the opposing side the right to do the same to yours, at least in their minds - if you don't observe the Geneva Convention, why should they? Many give examples such as "what if a bomb was about to go off" but in the time it takes to capture, transport and interrogate a prisoner, even if they give the correct answer, it will most likely have gone off. Why give the opposing side an excuse to do the same to your own? It's also unconstitutional (you have a right to trial, fair treatment etc.) if anyone still pays any attention to the constitution anymore other than Amendment #2...
Posted by: NumidiousNO
Those who say torture is okay should be tortured. They will not hold the same opinion, guaranteed.
Torture is not just a word. Don't distance yourself from torture while you form such a vile and truly WRONG opinion. Torture is absolutely NEVER okay. It is never justified.
Those who agree with torture are obviously, TORTURERS. I say let THEM experience it, so they know what they're advocating for.
It is EVIL and never, ever okay. I'd like to see any one of these "advocates" say that they're willing to be tortured, or that they'd accept being tortured.
That, is the better question.Posted by: JOKELESSHave you been subjected to torture?
I survived torture of the current regime in Sudan, the worst of its kind because it takes the religious justification.
The waiting period for torture session to start is the worst kind of torture. No wonder many people commit suicide during this time, if they were lucky and managed to find the right tool.
This is disgusting.Posted by: mohamedelgadiUNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES
I'm guessing most of you who said YES are either brainwashed Americans or have no idea what you are supportive of. TORTURE is a gruesome thing to do, no matter who the victim is. I am sure that there are many other ways of finding out the information you need, without losing your humanity. Torture is what people were using in ancient times, am I naive to believe that humanity has evolved since then? If you are supporting things like torture, you are definitely supporting the involution of your status as a human being.
Posted by: AnonymousNo one deserves that.
There is not a person in this world that deserves torture. People might say that there are bad people out there, but I think not. There are no bad people, just good people making bad decisions. People can change their ways. Put them in jail or a mental help facility, and give them counseling. Torture is primitive, unhuman, unjust, and cruel.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, just no.
As far as I'm aware, there is two types of torture, physical and mental. Both are never justified. While I would admit that the threat of torture is situationally effective, it is never the best choise. At best, you get information by scaring people. At worst, you get false (or even made up) informaiton by prisoners who did nothing wrong. Torture as a punishment does nohing but strethen the conflict. If say, Narnia (or a different country) kidnapps your parents and tortures them, how would you feel? I bet you would want to get revenge on Narnia wouldn't you? It is a cycle that will always continue.
Posted by: AnonymousUnquestionably NO.
You can never, NEVER, get reliable information from torture. What if what the the person who was tortured gave incorrect information just because he wanted the pain to stop? The person could just lie his way out of torture anyway (although... that's improbable). The most troubling thing about it is that there's always the chance that you are just torturing an innocent, and you can't get any good out of him anyway. It's cruel, barbaric, and unreliable. It should NEVER be used, under any circumstance.
Posted by: UnStupendousManjustified war
War inevitably brings death, destructions and suffering, which ruin both lives and nations. Some people believe it can be in exceptional circumstances, while others believe that it can never be justified and there is no circumstance in which it can be justified.War can be justified depends on the purpose of the war. If nations declare war to expand their territory or to fulfill their greed, it is unjustifiable. War is an immoral event that ruins humanity and the dignity of people, but, if it is to protect something that they are living for, such as a religion, a war might be justified. For example some religions culture can also effects war. They have fought for a long time because of their different religions. Their goal is to serve their religion and to extend their extreme beliefs. They were aware of countless deaths from the war, but humanity and dignity meat nothing without their religion. Wars can't be justified, people can fight over religion, power, land, or freedom but really most people want more than they need and are greedy. People die every day just to fight for their country and live a normal life. Why can't
Posted by: AnonymousNever in a million years
I'm guessing most of you who said YES are either brainwashed Americans or have no idea what you are supportive of. TORTURE is a gruesome thing to do, no matter who the victim is. I am sure that there are many other ways of finding out the information you need, without losing your humanity. Torture is what people were using in ancient times, am I naive to believe that humanity has evolved since then? If you are supporting things like torture, you are definitely supporting the involution of your status as a human being.
Posted by: AnonymousNo one deserves to be tortured just to find out information.
No one deserves to be tortured just to find out information. We all deserve to live, even the people who create problems for themselves. People who torture need to grow up and get a life because it's cruel and wrong and sick. Those people are going to regret it later on in life because karma will come around and get them. People shouldn't have to be tortured! TORTURE IS NEVER JUSTIFIED.
Posted by: AnonymousI oppose torture. There are always other ways to persuade a person or to get information from them.
I oppose torture in any form. I would hope our society as a while is against this as a way to receive information from someone or to punish them. We have a court system and prisons to use for a punishment for people who will not give up information or who have done wrong and torture should never be used in any way, shape or form. I even believe when it comes to illegal terrorists that torture should not be used.
Posted by: jointofviewNO. Never.
We should never have the legal right to harm another person, regardless of the reasons behind it. Torture is clearly "cruel and unusual punishment," which is prohibited by our constitution. I can't believe it's either up for contemplation whether torture is ethically justifiable. This is AMERICA, not a third world country! (Not that there's a huge difference anymore)...
Posted by: JessalynTorture is never justified.
Torture is not justified. For those of you who argue that it may help save innocents, just how innocent are these people who are content with the torture of another human being to save their own miserable hide? If you give up your integrity for a little safety, you are little more than a common beast, an animal with no sense of humanity. Clearly, if you find torture acceptable, then there are not many other violent means that you would not find acceptable. In that case, I hardly classify you as innocent anymore.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, because there's no way of knowing it will work.
There is no way of knowing what the subject being tortured actually knows. A lot of cases are also too extreme resulting in "accidental" death of the subject. If you are torturing a person for information, you have no way of actually knowing it will be reliable information. All you are ultimately doing is causing physical, mental, emotional, and psychological harm to the subject no matter how guilty.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is wrong and against human rights!
Would u like it if someone accused you of theft, or knowing some specific information and tortured you to tell them what is true? No right? Then why would humans go so low and torture their own brothers? Is there anything called logic left in us humans? I guess not.
Posted by: AnonymousNever
To the person in the other column who said that "In the 21st century, torture has become much more humane"... I hope everyone realizes that this sentence does not make sense in any way... Torture is by definition NOT a humane practice... And considering the following part saying that we do not hang people upside down and hack them to pieces... Well, have you seen the Abu Graib photos? Because they will show you that people who exercise torture do still do that. And even if they don't, how is waterboarding or physical and psychological degradation any more humane than this? Psychological torture might be even worse than physical torture, I don't understand how you can say that torture is more humane, I think that just proves the stupidity of the argument for torture.
Posted by: ClemmieNo way! Against human rights!!!
Torture is not acceptable at all...... it is a human right. And the way they tortured the Jews in the 2nd World War was disgusting and they were innconent and their lives were lost for nothing! People who torture other people are just sick.... I could not even imagine doing some of the tortures to other people, let alone do it myself.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is morally wrong, and it is never justified.
The use of torture is never justified. It is barbaric and immoral to treat another human being completely without compassion. Violence only breeds more violence. The justification for torture is often stated in convincing terms: it prevents deaths and violence. But, the end result will always be more violence. As far as I know, humans are the only species that resorts to using torture. This, alone, should indicate that there is something extremely wrong with it. It is unnatural and serves no positive purpose.
Posted by: 54IInfernoNo
No matter what they may have done, they are still human beings. I believe that somehow they will get their punishment but it is not up to us to decide. We should also consider that several of the people tortured have been innocent of any crime and falsely accused. We should treat others the way we want to be treated.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is NEVER justified
You can never justify torture. That is like saying that just because someone stole cookies, you could torture them. Torturing someone is not okay no matter what they did. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be punished; You can and should punish them. But there is a difference between punishing and torturing.
Posted by: AnonymousNEVER
I want to ask you, is torture acceptable in anyway possible? How can you claim to say that torture is acceptable no matter what the reason may be. Plus if this torture is done for interrogation purposes, how can you guarantee that torture will force the person to spill out the truth?
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is low
If the United States is the country that we believe it is, then we shouldn't torture. Torture is not a good way of getting information from suspected criminals. When someone is being tortured they will say what they think the torturer wants to hear, not necessarily the truth. Many people that are pro-torture probably have not had it done to them, so what do they know? Just as long as it doesn't happen to people they either don't know or care about or are labeled terrorist, it is justified to them which to me is a shame. There is a reason why common criminals in the United States are not tortured. It's because it doesn't work. So why do we torture alleged terrorist who don't belong to this country? It's because we are low. We've lost our respectability and above all racist. We water boarded the Muslim jihadist apparently involved with 9/11, so why didn't we do the same to the OKC bombers? Those guys were killed. America has become barbaric with our torturing of foreign enemies.
Posted by: kingdavid3000Abuse not torture
I was tied between two posts and wired up to a radio telephone generator. They, the military, burnt the hairs off of both arms from wrists to shoulders. Then drug me over to another post where they wrapped my ankles to the top and hung me upside down putting me in a hyperextended position. Started kicking me in the back all while pouring a canteen of water up my nose. The military said I had an upper respiratory infection, mood and personality disorder. X-rays showed a broken back. Would you allow your family and friends to be treated this way? Think about it. I don't have to, I know its wrong.
Posted by: AnonymousThere are ALWAYS other methods
More often then not, torture doesn't work. From a practical standpoint, the evidence gained through torture is often misleading or falsified. If I were holding a gun to your forehead and telling you to confess that you're a terrorist, you would probably do the same if the alternative were death.
In addition, it violates human rights and international law.Posted by: Dr.StrangeloveNot a chance.
I am a student studying torture and how it is inhumane, and I have found that there are techniques to torturing. How come we have torturing techniques but not a technique to stop the torture and crimes? When we find the solution to say it is humane to torture then maybe I will change my opinion, but as of now torture is wrong.
Posted by: AnonymousPeople are still human.
Could you possibly imagine being innocent, yet you're tortured everyday for information you don't have? It scares me that in a world like this, that people support it. Sure, you can say people are dying everyday and can be saved if we "force" this information out of them. But I don't want to live in a world where people are willing to hurt others, continually make them suffer with no end, just to save themselves. Or their people. In that case it might as well be a dog-eat-dog world. Is that what you want?
Posted by: AnonymousFire with fire? Can go both ways.
So if someone jumps off a building, will you do the same? If someone harms the country (as bad as this sounds), will we do the same? What good is this country's title if we can not live up to it? Known as the brave, the free, and JUST, will we descend because of the condescending? America, rise. Not America follow the footsteps of barbarians. Like the other said: torture at its best; hear what YOU want. Torture at its worst: hear nothing. Where is the truth and where is the justification?
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is never justified.
People should not be harmed in any way to get information out of them. There are other options. After reading what happened in Syria, it made me sick to my stomach and no one should live like that, especially not children. I personally think it is sick, and serves no purpose whatsoever.
Posted by: AnonymousNever
First, it gives gov't the power to torture people, which unquestionably breaks limits on its power. Second, conventional methods are as or more successful at gaining information, and third, the US military advises its members not to torture captives, as it is "not helpful" and "counter intuitive". It is a slippery slope so that gov't tortures its citizens for information period, and also is inhumane and increases resentment and terrorism against the USA.
Posted by: ContraIs one person's freedom and humanity more valuable than another's?
I imagine those who have said 'yes' are generally those who have never been tortured. It's always easy to say (and believe) that you or your side can justify doing something as terrible as torture, because you will be in the "right". But once an action such as torture is instigated, it is impossible to truthfully remain on the moral high ground if you are the torturer. You may try to convince yourself all you like - that you are potentially saving innocent lives/protecting others. But imagine you were one of these supposed innocents who had been "saved" as a result of a "terrorist" having been tortured. Would you feel comfortable knowing that you had lived at the cost of someone else's immense suffering or even their death?
Just because the person being torture may be involved in a harmful organisation or campaign, there is never any justification for the deliberate maiming of human beings. We should always say no to these kinds of things, especially if, by our emotions, we instinctively feel that we must hurt or kill others because they have somehow done us wrong. Using the argument of 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth' is also detrimental to our progress as rational, conscious beings. If we were to accept that idea, then any terrorists would also be perfectly justified in what they are doing, as they most likely feel that WE have wronged them somehow, either as individuals or as a society.
So don't just say yes because you think it will benefit you and your way of thought. There is always a reaction to an action, and an action such as torture can only bring a terrible backlash. Only say yes if you are truly willing to take the responsibility of causing another human being intolerable pain and degradation, as well as being willing to accept that by acknowledging torture as a "perfectly reasonable and acceptable" method of treating another human being under certain circumstances, this can be turned to apply to you also. Nobody is exempt, even those who think themselves to be on higher moral ground. We only realize this when the hurtful measures that we have endorsed in order to "protect" ourselves is turned against us. Actions that stem from fear and hatred can only inspire reactions in the same vein. A method such as torture never ends anything. It can only fuel the cycle of conflict within humankind.Posted by: AnonymousTorture is ethically wrong and an ineffective ways of extracting information. Torture causes hate towards the US from others and it's banned under US. law.
-Torture is completely immoral and unethical. It is also banned in US law, making it unconstitutional. The Geneva Conventions ban the use of “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture” (Article 3:1(a)).
-The torture methods that were used in Guantanamo Bay included but were not limited to water boarding, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, temperature extremes, sexual assault/humiliation techniques (despite sexual violence being a war crime), and sensory bombardment (noise).
-The emotional and psychological effects of torture can be devastating. August 2003 there were 23 suicide attempts in Guantanamo Bay. These torture techniques that are so cruel and inhumane are often ineffective as a means of gathering information as well.
-Torture victims often tell the interrogator what they feel he or she wants to hear. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who was water boarded 183 times on 2003, lied about knowing Bin Laden’s courier; So did Abu Faraj al-Libi, who was interrogated in 2005. Not one credible account from water boarding let the US to find Bin Laden.
-Torture jeopardizes our troop’s safety by creating more violent conditions for soldiers in the Middle East. The truth is that torture only keeps Americans safe if you don’t happen to count American soldiers as Americans.Posted by: AnonymousDigusting
Torture is a disgusting act and should never be perpetrated against anyone or anything, especially another human being. Torturing a torturer makes you no better than they. All methods of torture are not only emotionally destroying but physically excruciating and putting anyone through that kind of experience is completely and utterly barbaric.
Posted by: AnonymousTorture in Junk Out
Easy. Ask yourself if our system is corruption and/or error free. The Innocents Project is getting people wrongfully convicted freed after decades of false imprisonment.
Then, assume you are not guilty and you are being tortured. If you don't know anything and that's your answer and they keep on torturing you anyway I bet you'd come up with SOMETHING ANYTHING to get them to stop or maybe you'd implicate an innocent person to put a stop to pain mental & physical wouldn't you?Posted by: AnonymousTorture has gotten us nowhere in the modern world today
It says it in the Bible and in the constitution that torture is not legal or humane. I agree that these men/women feel that what they may be doing is right but we cannot replace that with another wrong. I also agree that these people forfeit their rights but torture is not the way to go. The end never justifies the means.
Posted by: AnonymousIt goes againts human rights!
Torture is obviously not justified. Even if someone has done something really bad or even inhuman they shouldn't be tortured. In my opinion they should be punished, not mistreated. Everybody deserves a minimum of respect. If what they did was that bad then they should get to say goodbye to their love ones and get sentenced to a fast and easy death at the worst, not decapitated and beaten!
Posted by: AnonymousIf it worked it would be
But torture doesn't work. People will say whatever they think that you want them to say to make you stop. It's as simple as that. However if torture was actually a good way of extracting information from somebody, then depending on the severity of situation, probably if any lives were at risk, then torture might be justified.
Posted by: Frederick53Try being on the other side of it.
Just try. The people you see as "bad" probably feel justified in their actions. Think about that.
Society has gone nowhere because the "eye for an eye" attitude exists. Harm is harm, killing is killing.
It is the refusal and forgetting of basic humanity. You are a human, not a bloodthirsty coward.
Harming anyone when they are rendered helpless is cowardly.Posted by: AnonymousTorture is never justified because it is inhumane.
Torture is an absolutely barbaric and archaic practice and is never justifiable in a civilized society. If someone doesn't want to talk about something that they are required by law to talk about then you can send them to jail, but you can't cause them physical pain. Torturing is a practice that has no place in a modern world.
Posted by: TwoVicNo, torture is never justified because human beings have an innate right to be free from harm.
Torture should never be an option for any reason. All people across the world have an inborn right to be free from harm and bringing pain and suffering to a person for the purpose of information gathering is a crime against humanity. Especially because one could be torturing someone that actually has no information and may give false information to the torturer to get them to stop.
Posted by: SlayClimnot benefitting
Its wrong and it doesn't get anyone anywhere. It doesn't have any great evidence of what actually happened and it appeals a lot of false accusations. I think it does not do atone any good and it does not retrieve correct information about the situation or any parts of what actually happened
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is never OK.
The ticking bomb scenario, or the risk to family and friends, is often used as a justification for using torture. This reasoning is appealing, and has it's merits in a heroic morality. The problem is that the argument is flawed. First it is an extremely rare scenario, where you would know with enough certainty that this person knows where a bomb is. It might not be him - and certainly does not justify the many, many people being tortured in the world. And that is another thing - who is to say who can be tortured and who cannot? Who has the perfect morale and all the knowledge to play God (who I don't think condones torture in any shape or form,) and decide who gets to be tortured and who not. And if my neighbor does it, I can do it too. Only terrorists, some will say. Before or after they have been convicted in a court of law? What if they are not terrorists after all - or don't know where the bomb is? Oops, sorry we pulled your nails out, mate, our mistake. Research has shown that torture will get people to say anything - so how reliable is the information you get out of it? No, everything points to the same answer - torture is NEVER OK. And, by the way, this is no news. States have already agreed on this. Torture is forbidden by international and national law in most of the world.
Posted by: AnonymousNo. Torture by any name is not only morally and ethically wrong , but does not work.
Regardless of what you call it, torture is something that is both morally and ethically wrong and goes against the very foundations of what this country is suppose to believe in. There is a long and establish history of the American government trying to be opposed to torture. In addition to that numerous studies have shown that torture does not work. When someone is being tortured they will admit to anything that they think the torture is wanting to hear in an effort to make the torture stop. Just looking at the events and testimonies of the Salem Witch trials alone proves this. There is no reason to expect that it would suddenly start working now when it did not work then.
Posted by: N4th4KenkaIts never acceptable-No matter who you are!
Because torture violates basic human rights, it treats the victim as a thing instead of a person, it shows that its ok to abuse people to get what you want, Two wrongs don't make a right! If a person is getting tortured because they tortured someone, then the torturer is just as bad as the victim, torture is cruel no matter who the victim is!
Posted by: m.squared14Heck No! Never
Why would you hurt someone for info.....Gosh even bloody weapons should be illegalized. I know I wouldn't have my blood hurt just for some info on a certain thing. By the way torture can lead to false info because when you are in pain you want to end it. Why don't you give false info and keep your secret!
Posted by: Mu9oNo, torture is never justified - if a person is guilty, then either sentence him or if not, set them free.
While many may disagree, I feel that any form of "torture" is not justified, simply because the person in question is generally only acting under the orders of a superior officer or personnel (who, in most cases, is never seen in times of battle). A person is guilty or not. If they're guilty, then sentence them (to death if necessary). If they're not guilty, set them free.
In addition, I also feel that those who are best qualified to answer this question are those who have been (or are currently) active in military battle, because only they truly know what it feels like to participate in war, potentially be captured or killed.Posted by: QuibarceTorture is never right or justified.
How far have we come? People were tortured in the US hundreds of years ago. When the tortured become the torturers, who is right then? If you torture, you go down to the level of the torturer! An eye for an eye will make everyone blind. Then who will be left to see?
Posted by: AnonymousTorture is never justified because the ends do not justify the means if we are abandoning our ideals.
Many people say torture is necessary because of the lives it will save, and that the end justifies the means. However, I believe a saying I heard once (I don't know who to attribute it to) that "The ends do not justify the means. There are no ends. There are only means." We cannot get a good outcome from a bad action, especially done consistently. If we use torture, then where can we say terrorism is bad? They could use the same argument: the ends justify the means. Terrorists have legitimate grievances, but instead of solving them in peaceful ways they use the worst and most terrifying and heartless violence they can think of. That is why they are terrorists. No one cares about their ends at all, they only care about their means, and that is what they are judged on. If I torture someone, then someday it might be my turn. Then how will I be righteously indignant about my treatment, when what was done to me is no worse than what I did to others? Whether or not you are a fan of the Bible, everyone understands and agrees with "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Everyone (except maybe a terrorist) would agree these are fine sentiments. How do we mesh them with torture? Especially in the United States, we pride ourselves on being a decent, honorable and fair people, who abhor the violence and cruelty practiced in the world by some other governments. Then we would practice torture? That violates all that we think we are, all that we want others to think we are. How much credibility do our fine ideals have around the world if we would under any circumstances approve of torture? Anyway, it does not work. People will say anything to escape torture. How do you know you got the truth or just disinformation? What if the person really doesn't have the information you want and you are torturing them for nothing? How monstrous is that? I would want no part of it.
Posted by: gaijinboyOf course not.
If someone does something immoral or illegal, they are still humans, and they can not just be tortured. If they need to learn their lesson and have a consequence, then they should be let to rot in jail. Ya, i know they did something tragic, like 9-11 but we can't blame them for being raised to violently and crudely. Everyone has a reason for doing something, and the people that cause harm don't know what path to follow in life. So they do immoral things. So just let them rot in jail, if that's what takes for them to change their mind about life. We are all humans, brothers, and we just have to live the harsh unfair life, and therefore no one should be killed or tortured purposely, it inhumane, just stick with the consequences, and the best one we have is making them live in jail, let them learn their lessons. Just no torture!
Posted by: AnonymousWho decides?
Who gets to decide what act of crime is worthy of torture? When do you say that enough is enough, and who decides this? Everyone has a different set of morals and opinions. I think that there are methods of obtaining information that are more practical and more accurate. While being tortured, the victim will often confuse the information they have, and the answer their torturers are trying to extract.
Posted by: AnonymousI oppose torture in any form, because it is inhumane and should not be put upon anyone.
Torture is morally wrong. People should not have someone else punish them in that fashion, when they are really not sure that that person is guilty, or has information they want. There are many other ways to get information from someone, and everyone should be treated equally. Jail time for some real convicts works, but torture should never be an option.
Posted by: R3yn4FerIiI am opposed to torture because it is wrong.
Torture is wrong and should not be used on that basis alone. We can't provide this as an example to the rest of the world as a way to conduct ourselves. Torture also tends to acquire misinformation because often the tortured will tell the torturer what they think they want to hear.
Posted by: IincoAdamCould you do it yourself?
Then don't suggest it for another person to have to inflict such violence. The more directly involved a person is with the conduct of torture, the more likely they are to develop posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, or anxiety. Would you have your wife have to torture a terrist? No. Would you have your husband? Your daughter or son? I think not. We are Americans, not cowards and we can fight our own battles without torture, we are too good for that. Don't be ignorant.
Posted by: krabonNo, torturing a human being is never justified.
For starters, as Americans we are suppose to be better than that, we are suppose to be the "bigger person" and be intelligent enough to find humane and civil means of finding out information. As a country that is suppose to stand for freedom and human rights we cannot stoop down to a level that is barbaric and inhumane. We have to be the example for how a country is suppose to run, not the country that everyone is fears. Not to mention, torture does not guarantee 100% accurate information. Personally, if someone were torturing me I would do everything in my power to ensure they were given false information as to make their situation more difficult, not help assist the individuals torturing me. If we are incapable of finding information ethically and legally than we do not deserve the information in the first place.
Posted by: jew0329