2006-09-14 15:09:39 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
This is a very complex question that brings up a lot of philosophical questions. First and foremost, I really dont think that we should be torturing anyone. Whether they are a supposed terrorist, or a random citizen. I believe that coming from a counry that believes in personal liberties, it would be completely hypocritical of us to torture others when we would never want anyone to torture us. And, even if we are absolutely sure that they are a terrorist, then even then, the the US is a participant the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT). This is a document which was signed by 141 countries and states "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." This breaks a very important UN resolution. There are also several human rights violations involved in something such as torture.
I also question the valididity of information that is gained under duress such as torture. Many will babble to make the pain go away.
Wow, that was really long, but that is a short thing about my belief.
Pyro
2006-09-14 15:34:10 · answer #1 · answered by pyro_briar 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Let's put it the other way round: if an American government agent knows something about a future attack on another country, do you think that country should torture the agent to obtain information? Can the Geneva convention be modified unilaterally to fit the current political mood of a US government whose competence is highly questionable? Do such double moral standards help the already low international credibility of the US? I strongly believe that extracting information from terrorists to prevent future attacks is necessary; but it must be done within the limits of international laws and conventions.
2006-09-14 22:45:19 · answer #2 · answered by I didn't do it! 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anyone should be tortured. That being said, we should do everything in our power to find out what "they" (in this case, the hypothetical terrorist) know.
But I'm against it for a more patriotic reason: I don't want OUR soldiers tortured. I live near a National Guard base. My mother lives next to an Air Force base. I have friends in the Army, the Air Force and the Navy and I don't want any of THEM to be tortured.
2006-09-14 22:15:07 · answer #3 · answered by mindar76 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The answer is a big fat NO. If torture is not right for Americans to be subjected to, then we have no right to treat others this way. Our government is never a lily white anyway......as the general public believes. Our US government is as hostile and nasty as any government in the world. We just don't want to know about the details.
2006-09-14 22:18:38 · answer #4 · answered by Cassie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Torture should not be used to find out any type of information. The result will be misleading or useless information because a person subject to torture will say anything to stop the pain.
2006-09-14 22:30:26 · answer #5 · answered by Johnny D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think if you know for a fact that they know something, you need to get the information one way or another. That being said, they might not talk anyway. I don't think its right to just torture people to find out who might have information. You would be surprised to how much info one would give with being over generous with them.
2006-09-14 22:14:15 · answer #6 · answered by sheltz32tt 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We already found out that torturing provided us with false information. Prisoners will say what you want them to say to "make it stop." It is one of the reason's this administration held on to the belief for so long that Saddam had WMDs. How well is that working for us?
A civilized nation does not torture.
2006-09-14 22:22:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are some study findings that show that torture tactics do not work, especially with extremists. It is all about psychology, and like most people and animals, positive reinforcement works better. Especially with negotiation tactics.
2006-09-14 22:19:06 · answer #8 · answered by allforasia 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Some mild torture (no severed body parts) will do him good.
Liberals just don't understand that you must sacrifice the few (especially evil scum) to save the many (and the innocent).
That is one of the reasons why leaders need to have spines in order to make those difficult decisions.
2006-09-15 00:12:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Even they are tortured they will not say a word. They are trained not to talk but kill themselves for God.
2006-09-14 22:27:23 · answer #10 · answered by armine_aksay 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋