The Pros And Cons Of Torture
Growing up in a safe country such as Canada, it is very easy to be naïve to the darkness and dangerous of a world it is in some places. Factions of people believe in using terror tactics such as rape and murder as tools of persuasion and promoting of their agenda. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment defines torture as:
“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on …show more content…
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”
Torture has no place in a civil society therefore it shall never be considered as a course of action, as we should hold our values as the prized positions they are.
As with many barbaric practices, torture has been widely utilized throughout human history. According to The History of Torture, (Innes) torture has been used over three thousand legal years with the oldest record incident around 1300 BC during the reign of Ramses II. Historically great empires such as the Greeks, Romans, Azteks and the Spanish have applied gruesome techniques in the hopes to gather information. (Innes) Furthermore, present day empires such as United States of America have had their image tarnished when the “enhanced” interrogation methods used in foreign prisons such as The Baghdad Central Prison, formerly known as Abu Ghraib prison were discovered. Humans are evolutionary in nature and therefore we should learn from our mistakes and grow as people.
The proponents of torture believe that the end justifies the means. As a society, we must determine at what limit morally we are willing to go to achieve the means of safety. Advocates for selective use of torture refer to a “ticking time bomb scenario” as justification. According to the book The History of Torture, Michael Levin a New York professor of philosophy details the following hypothetical scenario which takes place in Manhattan: On the day that a bomb is planned to detonate on Manhattan Island the suspected terrorist is detained. The scenario builds up to the question of whether is it morally right to use all methods including torture to obtain the location of the bomb which could save thousands of lives? This scenario pulls on the heart strings of people due to infamous New York City attacks during 2001. However, we must not think solely our emotions and think logically. This test should be discredited due to the near infinite amount of questions and paths which arise such as: If the bomber didn’t confess, should we torture the spouse or children for the hopes of more info? We cannot sway our strongly held beliefs on hypothetical tests as then we may overreact and cross a line which we may never be able to return.
If the main goal in resorting to torture is to extract vital information then the method is counterproductive. According to Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency “Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners… Use of such primitive methods actually put our own troops and our nation at risk.” General Soyster gives an example where the Federal Bureau of Investigation was extracting reliable information from a terrorist involved in the September 11 attacks in New York City until the Central Intelligence Agency which was known to use torture took over. Unfortunately General Soyster alleges that “there are numerous examples of cases where relying on information obtained through torture has disastrous consequences”. People who wish to remain in a free and safe society must stand behind methods of information extraction that are proven and humane which will not jeopardize our citizens and troops as a result.
When we preach about how we wish that other nations wish to operate morally we must hold our selves at the same standards as if we don’t then the hypocriticalness will shine though and affect our influence. If we live by the wording of the Bible “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:[1]2) then not resorting to the tactics which we condemn is how we should live our lives.
When a topic such as torture comes to debate we must step outside the box and look at the problem at a unique prospective.
The misconception that torture only affects the tortured is short sighted as we forget about the people which often reluctantly are following orders of the senior leaders. Regularly, these personnel which must administer the torture will manifest similar psychological problems such as; anxiety, Post-traumatic stress disorder and impaired social and cognitive skills. This is shown by the Nazi doctors which preformed experiments on humans during World War Two. Although, effects did not manifest during the years of experiments due to the lack of remorse, it was only years after the war that the doctors realized the atrocities which were done. Moreover, child soldiers in Africa will show the same signs even though the involvement was forced upon them, often at very young ages (Average age 12 years). When we think about the arguments against torture we must realize that the victims of torture is not always so …show more content…
evident.
Many argue morals are not plainly black and white yet a thousand shades of gray, however there is never a reason justify torture. Simplify morally and legally torture is wrong. As a rapidly globalist society we must not take policing this issue lightly. Countries which ignore The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment treaty must be punished swiftly and severely as it will send a message to other unmoral countries. By enforcing the treaty we protect the qualities which as humans we hold close. The arguments which was previously explained such as valuing the means with the ends, extracting credible information, preaching how we operate and valuing the mental state of all parties involved proves that torture has no place in this world.
Growing up in a safe country such as Canada, it is very easy to be naïve to the darkness and dangerous of a world it is in some places. Factions of people believe in using terror tactics such as rape and murder as tools of persuasion and promoting of their agenda. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment defines torture as:
“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”
Torture has no place in a civil society therefore it shall never be considered as a course of action, as we should hold our values as the prized positions they are.
As with many barbaric practices, torture has been widely utilized throughout human history. According to The History of Torture, (Innes) torture has been used over three thousand legal years with the oldest record incident around 1300 BC during the reign of Ramses II. Historically great empires such as the Greeks, Romans, Azteks and the Spanish have applied gruesome techniques in the hopes to gather information. (Innes) Furthermore, present day empires such as United States of America have had their image tarnished when the “enhanced” interrogation methods used in foreign prisons such as The Baghdad Central Prison, formerly known as Abu Ghraib prison were discovered. Humans are evolutionary in nature and therefore we should learn from our mistakes and grow as people.
The proponents of torture believe that the end justifies the means. As a society, we must determine at what limit morally we are willing to go to achieve the means of safety. Advocates for selective use of torture refer to a “ticking time bomb scenario” as justification. According to the book The History of Torture, Michael Levin a New York professor of philosophy details the following hypothetical scenario which takes place in Manhattan: On the day that a bomb is planned to detonate on Manhattan Island the suspected terrorist is detained. The scenario builds up to the question of whether is it morally right to use all methods including torture to obtain the location of the bomb which could save thousands of lives? This scenario pulls on the heart strings of people due to infamous New York City attacks during 2001. However, we must not think solely our emotions and think logically. This test should be discredited due to the near infinite amount of questions and paths which arise such as: If the bomber didn’t confess, should we torture the spouse or children for the hopes of more info? We cannot sway our strongly held beliefs on hypothetical tests as then we may overreact and cross a line which we may never be able to return.
If the main goal in resorting to torture is to extract vital information then the method is counterproductive.
According to Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency “Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners… Use of such primitive methods actually put our own troops and our nation at risk.” General Soyster gives an example where the Federal Bureau of Investigation was extracting reliable information from a terrorist involved in the September 11 attacks in New York City until the Central Intelligence Agency which was known to use torture took over. Unfortunately General Soyster alleges that “there are numerous examples of cases where relying on information obtained through torture has disastrous consequences”. People who wish to remain in a free and safe society must stand behind methods of information extraction that are proven and humane which will not jeopardize our citizens and troops as a result.
When we preach about how we wish that other nations wish to operate morally we must hold our selves at the same standards as if we don’t then the hypocriticalness will shine though and affect our influence. If we live by the wording of the Bible “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:[1]2) then not resorting to the tactics which we condemn
is how we should live our lives.
When a topic such as torture comes to debate we must step outside the box and look at the problem at a unique prospective. The misconception that torture only affects the tortured is short sighted as we forget about the people which often reluctantly are following orders of the senior leaders. Regularly, these personnel which must administer the torture will manifest similar psychological problems such as; anxiety, Post-traumatic stress disorder and impaired social and cognitive skills. This is shown by the Nazi doctors which preformed experiments on humans during World War Two. Although, effects did not manifest during the years of experiments due to the lack of remorse, it was only years after the war that the doctors realized the atrocities which were done. Moreover, child soldiers in Africa will show the same signs even though the involvement was forced upon them, often at very young ages (Average age 12 years). When we think about the arguments against torture we must realize that the victims of torture is not always so evident.
Many argue morals are not plainly black and white yet a thousand shades of gray, however there is never a reason justify torture. Simplify morally and legally torture is wrong. As a rapidly globalist society we must not take policing this issue lightly. Countries which ignore The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment treaty must be punished swiftly and severely as it will send a message to other unmoral countries. By enforcing the treaty we protect the qualities which as humans we hold close. The arguments which was previously explained such as valuing the means with the ends, extracting credible information, preaching how we operate and valuing the mental state of all parties involved proves that torture has no place in this world.
“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on …show more content…
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”
Torture has no place in a civil society therefore it shall never be considered as a course of action, as we should hold our values as the prized positions they are.
As with many barbaric practices, torture has been widely utilized throughout human history. According to The History of Torture, (Innes) torture has been used over three thousand legal years with the oldest record incident around 1300 BC during the reign of Ramses II. Historically great empires such as the Greeks, Romans, Azteks and the Spanish have applied gruesome techniques in the hopes to gather information. (Innes) Furthermore, present day empires such as United States of America have had their image tarnished when the “enhanced” interrogation methods used in foreign prisons such as The Baghdad Central Prison, formerly known as Abu Ghraib prison were discovered. Humans are evolutionary in nature and therefore we should learn from our mistakes and grow as people.
The proponents of torture believe that the end justifies the means. As a society, we must determine at what limit morally we are willing to go to achieve the means of safety. Advocates for selective use of torture refer to a “ticking time bomb scenario” as justification. According to the book The History of Torture, Michael Levin a New York professor of philosophy details the following hypothetical scenario which takes place in Manhattan: On the day that a bomb is planned to detonate on Manhattan Island the suspected terrorist is detained. The scenario builds up to the question of whether is it morally right to use all methods including torture to obtain the location of the bomb which could save thousands of lives? This scenario pulls on the heart strings of people due to infamous New York City attacks during 2001. However, we must not think solely our emotions and think logically. This test should be discredited due to the near infinite amount of questions and paths which arise such as: If the bomber didn’t confess, should we torture the spouse or children for the hopes of more info? We cannot sway our strongly held beliefs on hypothetical tests as then we may overreact and cross a line which we may never be able to return.
If the main goal in resorting to torture is to extract vital information then the method is counterproductive. According to Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency “Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners… Use of such primitive methods actually put our own troops and our nation at risk.” General Soyster gives an example where the Federal Bureau of Investigation was extracting reliable information from a terrorist involved in the September 11 attacks in New York City until the Central Intelligence Agency which was known to use torture took over. Unfortunately General Soyster alleges that “there are numerous examples of cases where relying on information obtained through torture has disastrous consequences”. People who wish to remain in a free and safe society must stand behind methods of information extraction that are proven and humane which will not jeopardize our citizens and troops as a result.
When we preach about how we wish that other nations wish to operate morally we must hold our selves at the same standards as if we don’t then the hypocriticalness will shine though and affect our influence. If we live by the wording of the Bible “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:[1]2) then not resorting to the tactics which we condemn is how we should live our lives.
When a topic such as torture comes to debate we must step outside the box and look at the problem at a unique prospective.
The misconception that torture only affects the tortured is short sighted as we forget about the people which often reluctantly are following orders of the senior leaders. Regularly, these personnel which must administer the torture will manifest similar psychological problems such as; anxiety, Post-traumatic stress disorder and impaired social and cognitive skills. This is shown by the Nazi doctors which preformed experiments on humans during World War Two. Although, effects did not manifest during the years of experiments due to the lack of remorse, it was only years after the war that the doctors realized the atrocities which were done. Moreover, child soldiers in Africa will show the same signs even though the involvement was forced upon them, often at very young ages (Average age 12 years). When we think about the arguments against torture we must realize that the victims of torture is not always so …show more content…
evident.
Many argue morals are not plainly black and white yet a thousand shades of gray, however there is never a reason justify torture. Simplify morally and legally torture is wrong. As a rapidly globalist society we must not take policing this issue lightly. Countries which ignore The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment treaty must be punished swiftly and severely as it will send a message to other unmoral countries. By enforcing the treaty we protect the qualities which as humans we hold close. The arguments which was previously explained such as valuing the means with the ends, extracting credible information, preaching how we operate and valuing the mental state of all parties involved proves that torture has no place in this world.
Growing up in a safe country such as Canada, it is very easy to be naïve to the darkness and dangerous of a world it is in some places. Factions of people believe in using terror tactics such as rape and murder as tools of persuasion and promoting of their agenda. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment defines torture as:
“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”
Torture has no place in a civil society therefore it shall never be considered as a course of action, as we should hold our values as the prized positions they are.
As with many barbaric practices, torture has been widely utilized throughout human history. According to The History of Torture, (Innes) torture has been used over three thousand legal years with the oldest record incident around 1300 BC during the reign of Ramses II. Historically great empires such as the Greeks, Romans, Azteks and the Spanish have applied gruesome techniques in the hopes to gather information. (Innes) Furthermore, present day empires such as United States of America have had their image tarnished when the “enhanced” interrogation methods used in foreign prisons such as The Baghdad Central Prison, formerly known as Abu Ghraib prison were discovered. Humans are evolutionary in nature and therefore we should learn from our mistakes and grow as people.
The proponents of torture believe that the end justifies the means. As a society, we must determine at what limit morally we are willing to go to achieve the means of safety. Advocates for selective use of torture refer to a “ticking time bomb scenario” as justification. According to the book The History of Torture, Michael Levin a New York professor of philosophy details the following hypothetical scenario which takes place in Manhattan: On the day that a bomb is planned to detonate on Manhattan Island the suspected terrorist is detained. The scenario builds up to the question of whether is it morally right to use all methods including torture to obtain the location of the bomb which could save thousands of lives? This scenario pulls on the heart strings of people due to infamous New York City attacks during 2001. However, we must not think solely our emotions and think logically. This test should be discredited due to the near infinite amount of questions and paths which arise such as: If the bomber didn’t confess, should we torture the spouse or children for the hopes of more info? We cannot sway our strongly held beliefs on hypothetical tests as then we may overreact and cross a line which we may never be able to return.
If the main goal in resorting to torture is to extract vital information then the method is counterproductive.
According to Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency “Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners… Use of such primitive methods actually put our own troops and our nation at risk.” General Soyster gives an example where the Federal Bureau of Investigation was extracting reliable information from a terrorist involved in the September 11 attacks in New York City until the Central Intelligence Agency which was known to use torture took over. Unfortunately General Soyster alleges that “there are numerous examples of cases where relying on information obtained through torture has disastrous consequences”. People who wish to remain in a free and safe society must stand behind methods of information extraction that are proven and humane which will not jeopardize our citizens and troops as a result.
When we preach about how we wish that other nations wish to operate morally we must hold our selves at the same standards as if we don’t then the hypocriticalness will shine though and affect our influence. If we live by the wording of the Bible “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:[1]2) then not resorting to the tactics which we condemn
is how we should live our lives.
When a topic such as torture comes to debate we must step outside the box and look at the problem at a unique prospective. The misconception that torture only affects the tortured is short sighted as we forget about the people which often reluctantly are following orders of the senior leaders. Regularly, these personnel which must administer the torture will manifest similar psychological problems such as; anxiety, Post-traumatic stress disorder and impaired social and cognitive skills. This is shown by the Nazi doctors which preformed experiments on humans during World War Two. Although, effects did not manifest during the years of experiments due to the lack of remorse, it was only years after the war that the doctors realized the atrocities which were done. Moreover, child soldiers in Africa will show the same signs even though the involvement was forced upon them, often at very young ages (Average age 12 years). When we think about the arguments against torture we must realize that the victims of torture is not always so evident.
Many argue morals are not plainly black and white yet a thousand shades of gray, however there is never a reason justify torture. Simplify morally and legally torture is wrong. As a rapidly globalist society we must not take policing this issue lightly. Countries which ignore The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment treaty must be punished swiftly and severely as it will send a message to other unmoral countries. By enforcing the treaty we protect the qualities which as humans we hold close. The arguments which was previously explained such as valuing the means with the ends, extracting credible information, preaching how we operate and valuing the mental state of all parties involved proves that torture has no place in this world.