Waterboarding during interrogations
Waterboarding
Law enforcement agencies and governments have long used torture to question criminals and terrorists. It is used to coax confessions or to find out any sort of information that may lead to the arrest or capture of other criminals. Although the torturing of prisoners in the United States is strictly prohibited by the constitution, the government started using the tactic waterboarding against terrorists. Although the government says waterboarding has led to prevention on mass terrorist attacks on U.S soil, it is not accepted by all of this country’s citizens. It is believed by certain people that waterboarding is torture and others do not believe it is. I believe this method is wrong and it is my goal to explore why the United States deemed this technique necessary and why I believe it is unconstitutional.
Waterboarding has extreme effects and side effects that can seriously harm someone, both mentally and physically. Waterboarding is a harsh process in which “The head is tilted back and water is poured into the upturned mouth or nose” (Wallach). This causes the victim to have the sensation of drowning and leaves them gasping for air as their lungs fill up with water. This is done in small increments of time, usually over a two to four hour period. While this is the general idea of waterboarding, it is and can be conducted in many different manners. The most popular method involves strapping the prisoner to an inclined board while shackling his hands and feet down to the board. The prisoner’s feet are then inclined slightly above their head and cellophane or a cloth is put over the prisoner’s nose and mouth. If the cloth method is being used, water is slowly dripped on the cloth to soak it in water until both the mouth and nose are completely covered in water. If cellophane is being used, water is poured over the prisoner’s head. During this, “the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt” (Esposito, Ross). While this does not usually cause death, many of the side effects are “extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, and lasting psychological damage”(Bowden).
History has shown that the United States was against Waterboarding and I believe it should return to order. After World War II, during the war crime tribunals, Japanese officer Yukio Asano, was convicted of committing war crimes of waterboarding against U.S. soldiers. He was sentenced to 15 years in a hard labor camp. Perhaps in the most public display of waterboarding yet, U.S. soldiers were caught using a similar water treatment on a Vietnamese soldier in 1968. A photograph catching them was put on the cover of the Washington Post. The soldier was later court martial and convicted. “In 1983, a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies were convicted of handcuffing prisoners to chairs and waterboarding them to goad confessions”(Wallach), they were each sentenced to four years in prison. These examples show that in the past waterboarding has not been accepted by the U.S. government. Whether it was U.S. citizens being subjected to it or performing it, the performers all ended up getting some sort of prison sentence. With that precedent, it is hard to believe that the government would employ these tactics against its prisoners. The government has shown its intolerance for this illegal method in the past, but has the audacity to use it against terrorists.
Waterboarding is with out a doubt one hundred percent torture. Many citizens agree and consider it torture, but one man set out to find the truth. Christopher Hitchens, a Vanity Fair reporter by trade, Hitchens decided that he would get a firsthand experience of waterboarding by former military men who had been trained on how to resist the treatment. He underwent the treatment and denies the fact that is simulates the experience of drowning. He says it is not the case because “you feel that you are drowning because you are drowning—or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure” (Hitchens). He goes on to talk about the long-term psychological damage that it has had on him. If he is ever short of breath he feels himself claw at his face as if trying to get the damp clothes off. After undergoing the treatment twice, Hitchens goes on to say, “I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture” (Hitchens). From someone who has experienced it first hand, Hitchens will strongly state that waterboarding is most definitely categorized as torture.
If the United States continues to use a technique that is both unlawful and immoral, than we as a country cannot take actions against other countries using the same techniques on our citizens. It is clear that if the U.S. is torturing prisoners the government is making immoral decisions. Even if the thought was to try to save U.S. citizens, the men that they tortured had been trained to resist the pain and not reveal any information. This being so, the U.S. made very unethical decisions in allowing this sort of treatment. The only way to fix these injustices is to do exactly what President Barack Obama did. He banned the use of waterboarding in January of 2009, “Some senior Obama administration officials, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., have labeled one of the 14 approved techniques, waterboarding, illegal torture”(Mazzetti, Shane). He stated that the United States must stick to army field guidelines at all times when dealing with war criminals, even on our home soil. I don’t believe it would be right to put the men on trial who administrated the treatment as they were getting direct orders from the President’s office. Although they had the free will to not administer the treatment, they thought what they were doing was right and helping their country. I do think that President Obama could help right the situation by bringing to the United Nations attention about how wrong water boarding really is. He could say that other countries should follow the United States footsteps and admit they were wrong and help better the conditions for other prisoners of war.
While President Obama has banned waterboarding, 40% of the American public still seems to think it is acceptable. If another attack similar to September 11th happens, would he reconsider it? Some citizens would ask: could waterboarding get the information we need in order so that this would never happen again? Even though this is a good question, waterboarding will make anyone say anything to stop the torture, even if one gives up information it may be false and “Extensive research has proved it to be ineffective and extreme”(Ross, Esposito). This topic should be put to rest, with Obama admitting that it is torture and vowing never to bring it back. If the President would admit that it is cruel and unusual punishment, it could be ruled unconstitutional by the courts and never be out into play again.
As research shows, citizens will always have their own opinion on this, but for the sake of my argument, waterboarding is wrong. I believe it is unethical, unconstitutional and wrong in so many ways. As I research interrogations and topics I cant help but think further into Death and the Maiden. I had an understanding to why Paulina held Roberto against his will, for the sake of closure and for him to confess to torturing her, but I now understand the tactics and methods behind the madness. Even though Paulina’s methods were no were near as heinous as waterboarding, her tactics were still being used for the same cause, answers.
Law enforcement agencies and governments have long used torture to question criminals and terrorists. It is used to coax confessions or to find out any sort of information that may lead to the arrest or capture of other criminals. Although the torturing of prisoners in the United States is strictly prohibited by the constitution, the government started using the tactic waterboarding against terrorists. Although the government says waterboarding has led to prevention on mass terrorist attacks on U.S soil, it is not accepted by all of this country’s citizens. It is believed by certain people that waterboarding is torture and others do not believe it is. I believe this method is wrong and it is my goal to explore why the United States deemed this technique necessary and why I believe it is unconstitutional.
Waterboarding has extreme effects and side effects that can seriously harm someone, both mentally and physically. Waterboarding is a harsh process in which “The head is tilted back and water is poured into the upturned mouth or nose” (Wallach). This causes the victim to have the sensation of drowning and leaves them gasping for air as their lungs fill up with water. This is done in small increments of time, usually over a two to four hour period. While this is the general idea of waterboarding, it is and can be conducted in many different manners. The most popular method involves strapping the prisoner to an inclined board while shackling his hands and feet down to the board. The prisoner’s feet are then inclined slightly above their head and cellophane or a cloth is put over the prisoner’s nose and mouth. If the cloth method is being used, water is slowly dripped on the cloth to soak it in water until both the mouth and nose are completely covered in water. If cellophane is being used, water is poured over the prisoner’s head. During this, “the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt” (Esposito, Ross). While this does not usually cause death, many of the side effects are “extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, and lasting psychological damage”(Bowden).
History has shown that the United States was against Waterboarding and I believe it should return to order. After World War II, during the war crime tribunals, Japanese officer Yukio Asano, was convicted of committing war crimes of waterboarding against U.S. soldiers. He was sentenced to 15 years in a hard labor camp. Perhaps in the most public display of waterboarding yet, U.S. soldiers were caught using a similar water treatment on a Vietnamese soldier in 1968. A photograph catching them was put on the cover of the Washington Post. The soldier was later court martial and convicted. “In 1983, a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies were convicted of handcuffing prisoners to chairs and waterboarding them to goad confessions”(Wallach), they were each sentenced to four years in prison. These examples show that in the past waterboarding has not been accepted by the U.S. government. Whether it was U.S. citizens being subjected to it or performing it, the performers all ended up getting some sort of prison sentence. With that precedent, it is hard to believe that the government would employ these tactics against its prisoners. The government has shown its intolerance for this illegal method in the past, but has the audacity to use it against terrorists.
Waterboarding is with out a doubt one hundred percent torture. Many citizens agree and consider it torture, but one man set out to find the truth. Christopher Hitchens, a Vanity Fair reporter by trade, Hitchens decided that he would get a firsthand experience of waterboarding by former military men who had been trained on how to resist the treatment. He underwent the treatment and denies the fact that is simulates the experience of drowning. He says it is not the case because “you feel that you are drowning because you are drowning—or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure” (Hitchens). He goes on to talk about the long-term psychological damage that it has had on him. If he is ever short of breath he feels himself claw at his face as if trying to get the damp clothes off. After undergoing the treatment twice, Hitchens goes on to say, “I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture” (Hitchens). From someone who has experienced it first hand, Hitchens will strongly state that waterboarding is most definitely categorized as torture.
If the United States continues to use a technique that is both unlawful and immoral, than we as a country cannot take actions against other countries using the same techniques on our citizens. It is clear that if the U.S. is torturing prisoners the government is making immoral decisions. Even if the thought was to try to save U.S. citizens, the men that they tortured had been trained to resist the pain and not reveal any information. This being so, the U.S. made very unethical decisions in allowing this sort of treatment. The only way to fix these injustices is to do exactly what President Barack Obama did. He banned the use of waterboarding in January of 2009, “Some senior Obama administration officials, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., have labeled one of the 14 approved techniques, waterboarding, illegal torture”(Mazzetti, Shane). He stated that the United States must stick to army field guidelines at all times when dealing with war criminals, even on our home soil. I don’t believe it would be right to put the men on trial who administrated the treatment as they were getting direct orders from the President’s office. Although they had the free will to not administer the treatment, they thought what they were doing was right and helping their country. I do think that President Obama could help right the situation by bringing to the United Nations attention about how wrong water boarding really is. He could say that other countries should follow the United States footsteps and admit they were wrong and help better the conditions for other prisoners of war.
While President Obama has banned waterboarding, 40% of the American public still seems to think it is acceptable. If another attack similar to September 11th happens, would he reconsider it? Some citizens would ask: could waterboarding get the information we need in order so that this would never happen again? Even though this is a good question, waterboarding will make anyone say anything to stop the torture, even if one gives up information it may be false and “Extensive research has proved it to be ineffective and extreme”(Ross, Esposito). This topic should be put to rest, with Obama admitting that it is torture and vowing never to bring it back. If the President would admit that it is cruel and unusual punishment, it could be ruled unconstitutional by the courts and never be out into play again.
As research shows, citizens will always have their own opinion on this, but for the sake of my argument, waterboarding is wrong. I believe it is unethical, unconstitutional and wrong in so many ways. As I research interrogations and topics I cant help but think further into Death and the Maiden. I had an understanding to why Paulina held Roberto against his will, for the sake of closure and for him to confess to torturing her, but I now understand the tactics and methods behind the madness. Even though Paulina’s methods were no were near as heinous as waterboarding, her tactics were still being used for the same cause, answers.