Is torture ever justified/acceptable?
Discussion
Very interesting piece by Stephen Glover in the Mail today, referring to the capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, 'allegedly the third most important man in Al Qaeda'. He guesses that the Pakistani authorities are probably giving him a bloody good going over, and that outside of the U.S. (and therefore under less scrutiny from the judiciary et al) the CIA also use torture because as he puts it 'they aren't going to spill the beans over a cigarette and a cup of coffee'. While I know that religious fanatics are the least likely to crack, they say everyone talks eventually...so is it justified to get information that could potentially save thousands of lives, or is it dragging us down to their level?
Emphatically not. Even discounting ethical issues and the possibility of the country lurching towards a 'The Siege' style scenario testimony acquired under torture has been proven to be unreliable and I would have thought we were better off with a little, useful, information than a lot of unreliable information under the circumstances.
>> Edited by jondokic on Tuesday 4th March 11:47
>> Edited by jondokic on Tuesday 4th March 11:47
well, the danger is always that they will torture an innocent person and end up with a worthless false confession or duff information. I'm sure Derek Bond wouldn't agree that the US agencies be allowed to deploy torture as a means of interrogation.
Expdience is the key in such serious cases though, and if they have to beat the shit out of this bloke, pull out his fingernails and cheese-grate his gonads then all well & good if a result is what we get.
Expdience is the key in such serious cases though, and if they have to beat the shit out of this bloke, pull out his fingernails and cheese-grate his gonads then all well & good if a result is what we get.
Plipton said: IMHO torture is NEVER acceptable. Admittedly it's a moral dilemma - torture 1 to save thousands.(
It also has the potential to develop into a 30s Germany/Stalinist USSR scenario, torturing and murdering thousands to save a regime-are we convinced the Feds/CIA are qualified to decide who to torture ?
>> Edited by jondokic on Tuesday 4th March 11:50
While I think it is an extremely difficult situation, I have to say I am leaning towards saying that in some circumstances (this being one) it is acceptable; you can't fight Queensbury rules when the other guy is a streetfighter. I also know what I'd be thinking if I was in charge of looking after him right now: 'Hmmm do I give him a cup of coffee or hang him from the ceiling and smack his kidneys in?...'
I admit though that this does open up a massive can of worms.
I admit though that this does open up a massive can of worms.
Difficult to define what torture is. Sleep deprivation doesn't do you much psychological or physical harm in the longterm, but its pretty unpleasant at the time. We'd probably call that a form of torture. Being interviewed by a UK policeman agressively isn't "nice" either (and has led to false confessions), but we don't count that as torture. The Israelis are happy enough to administer a few slaps and shove their interviewees around. They would certainly claim that it doesn't go any further than that. They reckon it is a valid way of extracting information quickly, Amnesty International think it is torture.
Difficult (and ultimately arbitrary) where you draw the line. Being seen to be barbaric is certainly counterproductive as well as being immoral. A bit of short term, primarily psychological torture is probably OK ... hell, I go to work on the Northern Line. If that ain't torture, show me what is...
Difficult (and ultimately arbitrary) where you draw the line. Being seen to be barbaric is certainly counterproductive as well as being immoral. A bit of short term, primarily psychological torture is probably OK ... hell, I go to work on the Northern Line. If that ain't torture, show me what is...
It's generally recognised that in World War 2 the Allies did mot systematically torture their prisoners of war whereas the Japanaese and, on some occasions, the Germans (usually through the Gestapo) did. Yet which side won?
Torture is not only unacceptable but also illegal under the Geneva Convention. The Americans are currently refusing to grant prisoner of war status to the captives held at Guantenamo Bay although they are "prisoners" and most of them were captured during a "war". By denying them this staus and refusing to treat them as "civilian" captives, they are avoiding the terms of the Geneva Convention or US legislation regarding the incarceration of civilians.
This is a departure from America's usual "fairness" in dealing with captives and is certainly well out of line with their brehaviour in World War 2.
Torture is not only unacceptable but also illegal under the Geneva Convention. The Americans are currently refusing to grant prisoner of war status to the captives held at Guantenamo Bay although they are "prisoners" and most of them were captured during a "war". By denying them this staus and refusing to treat them as "civilian" captives, they are avoiding the terms of the Geneva Convention or US legislation regarding the incarceration of civilians.
This is a departure from America's usual "fairness" in dealing with captives and is certainly well out of line with their brehaviour in World War 2.
Was ready to jump straight in with a big NO. However, as has been pointed out, where do we draw the line.
The biggest problem is the same as with capital punishment. Are you really sure a mistake could not have been made.
IMHO if we sink to their (terrorist) level, why not just let them take over? We really are better than that.
The biggest problem is the same as with capital punishment. Are you really sure a mistake could not have been made.
IMHO if we sink to their (terrorist) level, why not just let them take over? We really are better than that.
cover a truncheon in chilli powder and insert 
if they don't break after that - then no amount of battering is going to help.
But I guess I don't believe in toture as a legitimate tool for democracy. It all boils down to who you trust to deciede when its appropriate and who to.
anyway with toture - if they can't tell the truth YOU want to hear - then how far do you go before you have to admit you were wrong. And think of the lawyers !
if they don't break after that - then no amount of battering is going to help.
But I guess I don't believe in toture as a legitimate tool for democracy. It all boils down to who you trust to deciede when its appropriate and who to.
anyway with toture - if they can't tell the truth YOU want to hear - then how far do you go before you have to admit you were wrong. And think of the lawyers !
As already mentioned physical torture always gets answers. However it very rarely gets correct answers. The intelligence agencies of the world know this and are unlikely to resort to the thumb screws. They'll get the right answers it just might take a while.
Is torture ever justified? Well physical torture is never justified both on the grounds of ethics and practicality.
Edited to exclude lawerys from the above statement....
>> Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 4th March 12:44
Is torture ever justified? Well physical torture is never justified both on the grounds of ethics and practicality.
Edited to exclude lawerys from the above statement....
>> Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 4th March 12:44
Tony Hall said: we're subject to it most nights, have you seen whats on TV nowadays...it's torture watching the likes of Eastenders
totally agreed.. we spent a small fortune on a plasma screen and I hardly ever watch the damned TV now because Mrs Zee ricochets from Arsenders to Flourination St to feckin Emmerdale..
Total brain atrophying shite. I wondered if there had ever been a study into possible links between extensive soap watching and mental health problems - I mean it can't help but be depressing to immerse yourself in these dreadful fictitious existences..
Undertaking torture also involves dehumanising the captives to the point at which people are willing to torture them. There's a lot to be said for not seeing people as less than human:
www.observer.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,905613,00.html
www.observer.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,905613,00.html
In a word NO!
Your actions regardless of who or what you are will always effect you, so by torturing some one you yourself will tend to become numbed to the terror and in doing so will lose a part of your humanity.
This applies on a national scale. The german people on the whole accepted the atrocities carried out by the Nazis against the jews, slavs, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally disabled etc, and now germany suffers from a national paranoia of war and conflict.
Your actions regardless of who or what you are will always effect you, so by torturing some one you yourself will tend to become numbed to the terror and in doing so will lose a part of your humanity.
This applies on a national scale. The german people on the whole accepted the atrocities carried out by the Nazis against the jews, slavs, gypsies, homosexuals, mentally disabled etc, and now germany suffers from a national paranoia of war and conflict.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff