Getting your teeth pulled and fingers snapped for not letting the enemy know where the rest of your brigade is hiding, is a common torture tactic. In most cases you just want the pain to stop, so you give false information. This is why I feel ,no, torture should not be a tactic to retrieve information and should be abolished in this country. In the essay The Torture Myth written by Anne Applebaum, torture is discussed and evaluated by the writer. Applebaum focuses on whether torture is a good vice to gain information from a person and it is insinuated that she does not, based on her arguments in the essay. I too believe torture is not a humane nor moral way to obtain truthful information.…
The main idea of this passage is to expose the irrelevance of the ticking bomb scenario for the topic of torture. The article as a whole does not take a direct stand for or against or torture, however, it slightly attacks the areas for torture. In addition, with a vast amount of reasoning and evidence the authors cover all areas relating to the topic of torture such as morals and humanity being the most controversial questioned issues in reference to the…
Boom! Suppose a terrorist in custody has hidden a bomb in a very populated city, it is scheduled to go off in an hour and he is the only one that knows the location. He will not disclose the location unless his outrageous demands are met, it would be left to the assumption there is only one option left to save millions, that is, torture. Although this invented instance is effective it is just one tactic to get a readers attention and agreement. In the two essays, “Yes, It Should Be “On the Books”” by Alan M. Dershowitz and “The Case for Torture” by Michael Levin, being evaluated, the authors use not only this technique but also many others to persuade the readers to take on their views. Dershowitz uses real examples to support his points and is direct on where he stands on the matter, but sometimes he seems a little pushy and cold. Levin on the other hand fascinates us with his hypothetical cases while griping the reader’s attention throughout his essay, but assumes agreement on the reader’s part and uses tactics of fear to persuade. The styles of both essays differ greatly just as much as the personas and methods of persuading do, but the purpose of both essays are very similar, which is to persuade the audience to accept that torture is permissible under certain circumstances. These topics will be discussed and evaluated while ethos, logos, and pathos are being emphasized. And this will be done in order with article 1 then article 2.…
At some point everyone has heard of torture. It could have been in a movie or on the news, but they have heard of it. In this day and age, people would like to have believed it was all behind us in the past. Then 9/11 happened, everyone’s lives were changed with one simple act of cruelty. Before 9/11 hit the U.S. in a wave of pain, panic, and anger, our viewpoints on torture would probably have been less likely that it should be allowed. The decision to torture people who are suspected of being part of terrorist groups has always been decided by the government, for the simple reason that it is required to keep us safe from harm. Some people believe that torture is cruel, unsightly and just inhumane. On the other hand there are people who see it the same way but also believe it could be necessary in extreme circumstances. We’re going to look at two different points of torture: When it is acceptable and when it is not acceptable.…
The points I will cover in my paper are the following: 1. WHY TORTURE. 2. IS INFORMATION GATHERED FROM TORTURE VALID. 3. WHO WILL ULTIMATLY BE RESPONSIBLE IF TORTURE IS UPHELD TO BE LAWFULL. 4 WHAT GOES THROUGH THE MIND OF THE TORTURED INDIVIDUAL. AND 5 WHAT GOES THROUHGH THE MIND OF THE TOUTRUER. Other points may follow…
Henry Shue begins his article discussing torture with constraints which allows the victim to “surrender” and comply with the demands of the torturer. According to the Constraint of Possible Compliance (CPC), “the victim of torture must have available an act of compliance which, if performed, will end the torture” (Shue 427). With the aim of interrogational torture being to extract information from a person with holding it, this torture appears to satisfy the constraint of possible compliance, since it offers an escape, in the form of providing the information wanted by the torturers, which affords some protection against further assault. In practice there are evidently only a few pure cases of interrogational torture. For the most dominant type of torture that occurs today is considered to be terroristic. Terroristic torture is meant to put fear in not only the victim, but also all those who oppose that government. The victim’s suffering is being used as a means to end over which the victim has no control over.…
Is the intentional pain that an individual experiences justified by the possibility of preserving the lives of many? Torture is the used as a weapon, but in reality does it work? The purpose of this essay is to identify what the motives are for using torture, the effectiveness of torture, and important issues or flaws with the entire process of torture.…
When it comes to the topic of torture, most of us will readily agree that torturing someone in order to get information is not the answer. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of how guilty a person is, and what should be done in the case of a bombing. On the one hand, people argue that torture is unconstitutional and should not be practiced because it questions a person’s morality and what they are willing to do in order to get results. On the other hand, however, others argue that we should allow torture because it is more just than allowing thousands of innocents to die because we didn’t want to question a single person. I have mixed feelings on the topic. While I recognize that our actions may be for the greater good, we cannot allow ourselves to lose our morality because of it. I do not believe that a person should be tortured for information unless it is under specific circumstances. What I mean by this is that people should not torture someone unless that person is obviously guilty or it is…
It is my belief that the essay “The Case for Torture” is flawed and that Torture is impermissible whatever the case.…
There are many questions relating to the use of torture against any person whatsoever. As such, there are different perspectives on the ethics of its usage as well. While some believe that the use of torture becomes necessary at times, others believe that whatever the circumstances are, torture can never be justified. Some very pertinent issues related to the use of torture are, “Suppose a child has been kidnapped and a person has been suspected of committing the crime. Is it justifiable to torture that person in order to try to extract information from him about the child? Now suppose the person would not react at all if he is subjected to torture but there is a chance that he would divulge information if his child of the similar age as the…
This paper addresses one of the most abiding and heated controversies surrounding the topic of torture and morality. Put simply, this controversy concerns the issue of whether under extreme and exceptional circumstances, a government agency should be legally permitted to use torture as a means of punishment or extracting information. According to Oxford Dictionary, torture is defined as “The action of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something”.…
By torturing captured terrorists during the interrogation process, supporters of torture of terrorists also advocate that the country have the absolute right to implement various usage of torture, regardless of what foreign countries believe. Supporters of torture of terrorist continue to justify their means of why torture is essential, because if terrorists attack America, it is the United States of America right absolutely to punish terrorists by any means…
In the article “The Truth about Torture”, Charles Krauthammer considers the ticking time bomb problem and argues that torture is sometimes not only morally permissible, but morally necessary. Krauthammer uses the example of terrorists in his example, what if we captured a terrorist with knowledge of an attack and the knowledge of future attacks; do we torture him for his information? Or simply just have him locked up? (Krauthammer 2). Utilitarian considerations are sufficient to justify using cruel actions against terrorists to extract confessions. Even though is cruel to torture one to extract information, it is our duty as citizens to maintain the happiness as a whole and do what is necessary to save lives.…
In the threat of national security, the debate on torture is confronted with legal and moral dilemmas of permissibility. In the hypothetical case of the ticking-bomb terrorist, torture is perceived as either an advantageous means of national security, or a violation of human rights. Although it is a “slippery slope,” in order to preserve the balance between national security and civil liberties in a democratic society, torture should be prohibited.…
That is one of many arguments our government makes when it comes to torture. Additionally, there are a certain group of people that agree with our government to do the inhumane action towards detainees. However, that is not always the case. From Duke University, Robin Kirk expressed, “Torture is wrong; it does not make us safer; it does not work; it paves the way for further and more reprehensible torture; it stains those who practice it; it damages torture practitioners, who live with the effects for the rest of their lives” (234). The case of torture that the American government uses is wrong and not the safest way to keep the people protected.…