Ethical Positions Research Paper : Torture

Torture is something that is known as wrong internationally. Torture is “deliberate, systematic or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons acting on the orders of authority, to force a person to yield information, to confess, or any other reason” (World Medical Association, 1975, pg.1). There is a general consensus that there is a right to be free from any kind of torture as it can be found in many different human rights treaties around the world. The treaties show that all of the thoughts about torture are pointing away from the right to torture someone no matter what the case

Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.

And it is also prohibited. But the truth is, even when being outlawed, torture is still used silently, especially in the interrogation of terrorists. Did it have any effect on the long-term battle against terrorism of the U.S and the world? According to John McCain, it is a no. In “Torture’s Terrible Toll”, he wrote about his own experience:

Torture is not a new ethical dilemma, because torture has been practiced throughout human history and in different cultures. Now, however, the Geneva Convention and other modern norms suggest that human beings should not resort to using torture. Torture is becoming taboo as a method of intelligence gathering, which is why the methods used during the Iraq war were decried. However, the ethical case can be made for torture. If torturing one human being leads to information that could save the lives of a thousand, torture suddenly seems like a sensible method. This is a utilitarian perspective on torture, which many people find palatable. However, there are problems with this method of thinking about torture. The state-sanctioned use of torture creates a normative framework in which torture becomes acceptable. Torture sends the wrong message about what a free, open, and enlightened society should be. Even if torture is only acceptable in extreme circumstances, as with a suspect who might know something about an impending terrorist attack, who decides when and what type of torture should be used? There is too much potential for abuse of the moral loophole with regards to torture. If the United States hopes to be a role model, then torture cannot fit into its intelligence methods.

“A Case For Torture” is an essay written by Michael Levin in which he tries to make a compelling case for the use of torture as a punishment during specific situations in the United States. Levin cites different hypothetical situations in order to logically prove his argument. His use of theoretical instances is meant to help direct the reader to an understanding of the applications of his policy on torture. The examples he uses include a hypothetical terrorist attack on Manhattan and hospital robbery. But unfortunately, the examples Levin cites lack strength due to their inapplicability to the current world. Equally important, in today’s terrorist centered climate, there is no room for Levin’s position on torture. Michael Levin in “A Case For Torture” is not logically convincing in his discussion as to why torture is a valid form of punishment, because his assertions rely too heavily on the speculative, and are not contemporary enough for use in modern times.

The definition of torture is perceived differently to every person. In this dispute, the two opposing sides are generally immovable. Many claim that it is not an effective tool, it is downright wrong, and it just does not work, while the other side claims the opposite. The argument “The Gray Zone: Defining Torture” by Barry Gewen examines the controversial issues that erupt from the touchy topic of torture. Gewen writes a successful and persuasive argument for his favorable position towards torture as an effective mean for gathering information and halting life-threatening situations which he does through his use of strong premises, logos, and ethos, building him a credible and structurally sound argument.

Torture of a person is defined as the action of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or to force them to do something. Tormenting a person who is a severe threat to our country’s freedom is acceptable as long as they are not tortured to death. The torture given should depend on the harshness of the threat they are inflicting on the country and the people that inhabit it. Examples of severe threats could include terrorism, spying, fake news, fraudulence, and many more. These are the types of threats the government should be focusing on.

The United Nations defines torture as any act by which severe physical or mental pain or suffering is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining information or a confession, or punishing a person for an act that he is suspected of having committed. Torture also includes intimidating or coercing a person for any reason based on discrimination of any kind when a person acting in an official capacity inflicts pain or suffering (Convention Against Torture para. 2). Although some people believe that torture is acceptable, in reality it is neither an acceptable nor a reliable method for obtaining information and should not be continued.

Since the time of Ancient Greece, there has been an ongoing debate whether torture should be permitted in the United States of America. Torture is define as the intentional use to inflict physical or physiological pain to control and gain advantage over an individual.

The U.S. government’s misguided embrace of torture, secret prisons, and renditions to torture over the past seven years have undermined its counterterrorism efforts, provided enemies with an easy recruiting tool, and diminished the United States’ reputation as a world leader in advancing and upholding human rights. Restoring our nation’s commitment to humane treatment must be a top priority for the next president. This is not a partisan issue; during the 2008 presidential campaign, both President-elect Barack Obama and Senator John McCain acknowledged the damage to the reputation of the United States that has been caused by this policy of torture and official cruelty, and each has vowed as president to uphold existing bans on torture the Bush

For years after the terrible acts of 9/11 the United States Government used many different tactics to acquire information about Osama bin Laden and the terrorist group known as Al Qaeda, who was involved with them, and what they were planning next. The way the government, the CIA specifically, tried and succeeded in torturing its detainees was astounding and sometimes stomach churning as shown in the movie, Zero Dark Thirty, and it’s no wonder that President Obama reformed the laws and regulations that President George W. Bush installed and allowed the CIA to do. The second item about torture for military use was the reliability of the techniques and how often and how much information was actually acquired from

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

This research paper talks about the controversy of torture in America. Torture is defined as a punishment of severe and intentional pain, either mentally or physically, inflicted on a person, particularly to receive information from him or her (“Defining Torture”). Starting around 530 A.D., the Romans started using torture as a tactic to get statements from people that they claimed they could not get any other way. For the same reason, the French and Italians adopted using torture around the twelfth-century; however, they began to inflict torture on people because their law system required that they must have a confession from the suspect or witnesses in order to punish the person (Green). America adopted similar practices such as the French and Italians did, but the United States government claims that torture has only been used as a way to keep America safe from

In the United States legal system, torture is currently defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” as defined by Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (US Code, 1) Though this is a seemingly black and white definition, the conditional “…other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions…” have led many to question what precisely this entails. In other words, what are the lawful sanctions that permit such acts? Are they ethically right? Where is the line drawn as torture

The unfortunate attacks that happened on September 9th, 2001 was one of the last times torture was used against foreign enemies. The United States government under the Bush administration legalized forms of torture against Taliban forces also known as” Operation Enduring Freedom” (Robbins), “Since 2001, the United States has aggressively fought against international terrorism, which has resulted in the capture, detention, and interrogation of tens of thousands of suspected terrorists and insurgents. (Robbins)”. Meaning any detainees that the United States currently held were subject to forms of torture to extract any information that would lead to the where bouts of the terrorists associated with the attacks. The action by the United states came with a lot of criticism, but the results of those actions obtained key information on the location of the terror groups leader. It wasn’t until Obama’s administration that they obtained the knowledge of where exactly Osama bin Laden was. Then on May 2, 2011 the United States Navy Seals raided