Human beings, by their very nature, strive for a sense of security. It allows them to operate productively, and lubricates the virtues and high aspirations of society. While safety is certainly a circumstance to be treasured, the vulnerability that pokes its head through the cracks should not be taken for granted. Deviations from the good times allow for the exploration of what we might be willing to do for our own well being. This is made especially clear through the recent American debate on torture. Nations have tortured, both within and without their own citizenry, for thousands of years. The act of systematically inflicting severe harm on a human being for the benefit of others has been met with varying degrees of success. …show more content…
The Geneva Conventions would be rendered meaningless is they relied on the subjectivity of any given person or group of people. Levin, however, argues that even though torture is against the law, it may at some point be “morally mandatory” (681). Just being on the books does not make a law right. He uses the “ticking time bomb” scenario to highlight his case. If an impending strike targeting the lives of hundreds, or thousands, of people could be avoided by sacrificing the life of one, Levin argues that it is morally right to do just that. But John McCain once again counters the fragility of Levin’s argument through both example and reflection in a refusal to treat his enemies the way in which he was treated (700). McCain is living proof of the importance of honor through moral superiority, even over life. Moral standards are only effective when absolute. Just as McCain undermines the ethics of the ticking time bomb scenario, Cathy Young illustrates the ineffectiveness of its application. The given situation “is not only extremely improbable, it’s also one in which torture is most likely to be useless” (693). With an attack on the way, a terrorist would only need to hold off until its commencement. They could also provide false information to pacify their torturers. McCain recalls substituting the names of the men in his flight squadron with the Green Bay Packers offensive line (697). Instead, there are better ways to obtain reliable
Applebaum's second argument for eliminating the torture policy is that it constantly enables the enemy to build tolerance for the torture. Applebaum uses the example of “radical terrorists are nasty, so to defeat them we have to be nastier.” This example clearly illustrates the fault within the misconception that torture is ultimately effective. There can also be unnoticed and lasting consequences to torture, that in turn, affect more than the individual country. The global stigma that is labeled upon any country that participates in or allows the torture of wartime prisoners is remarkably important. The public and self image that the respective country acquires, affects
Imagine awaking in the morning, going downstairs and preparing the morning meal. While enjoying the sunshine through the kitchen window along with a chai tea latte, the news on the television suddenly changes from the mundane to chaotic confusion, disaster has struck! The implausible has just happened and the nation is in chaos. This disaster could happen at any moment and at any point across the globe. If the only method of prevention to this traumatic event is by the skilled technique of information extraction known as torture, would it not be the government’s obligation to the people to ensure this method of prevention was exercised? When considering the threat from extremists, the United States government must allow for the use of
The Abu Ghraib torture scandal left a large blemish on the occupation of Iraq and George Bush’s War on terror. As stories of the torture happening in the Abu Ghraib prison began circulating, American citizens had trouble comprehending the acts of evil their soldiers had committed on Iraqis. Some began to see a correlation between Abu Ghraib and the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment. Though the guards in both situations were brutal to their captives, distinct differences lay in the severity of their actions. Abu Ghraib’s guards were much more vicious to their captives, and this can be attributed to the prejudices the guards felt against their captors, the environment, and the lack of training, compounded with a lack of accountability in the leadership.
In contrast, some individuals may debate that torture and even some more minuscule forms of torture can be beneficial to obtaining the information needed. It is debated that torture has been used in a large portion of political systems in history, and that the “degree” of torture is a significant component when deciphering right vs. wrong. Moher argues that in a political system where torture is justifiable and legal, the torture used would be less extreme than what it is today (Moher, 2013). It is reasoned that different degrees of torture are more acceptable than others, in that some are less psychologically and physically harming. A
In this article, written by Andrew Fiala, the topic of discussion is torture, terrorism, and the lesser evil of arguments. Fiala has many strong statements about torture, and how there are different types used in different situations and it being to excessive. He touches on terrorism of how it is wrong, but he states that the terrorist is closely related to torture. Then he touches on the double-standards that moral standards of people sacrificing themselves to save others. Fiala argues that torture needs to be diminished, then argues that terrorism and torture are closely linked, but they have many differences, and then how the “fat man” analogy is what terrorism can be compared to.
There is a fine line between taking the enemy captive as part of war and torturing them. I believe that during war it is inevitable that people are going to be held captive as part of war, but there is some sort of humanity that needs to be upheld at the end of the day. There are many international treaties such as the Geneva Convention that many nations are a part of. The idea behind the convention is to make sure that all of the nations are on board with one another on how they are going to treat people. The problem is that most other nations besides the United States have a different mindset of how they operate and how they believe people should be treated in situations of war or high profile people. Most people would like to live in the United States because of all of the rights everyone has here in the country.
“Today you are you, that is truer than true. There no one alive that is youer than you!” Dr. Seuss is frequently acknowledged for his poems along with his children books. Thus meaning, he caught the attention of people especially children because of the way he used words to create a image in people's minds. Furthermore, In this analysis essay I will explore how Dr. Seuss uses repetition and tone/ theme to generate diverse effects for the reader to consider.
Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are
Torture has been a sensitive subject in our government and among the people of the US. The article “Torture is Wrong-But it Might Work” Bloche about how even though torture is not moral to some, it can still provide effective results because of advanced techniques and psychological studies. He goes on to say that many believe it is effective but others will say it does not provide adequate results in interrogation efforts. Senators such as John McCain (R-Ariz.) believe it does not help at all; however, other government officials, such as former attorney general Michael Mukasey and former vice president Dick Cheney, believe it does (Bloche 115).
In 2002, the Office of Legal Counsel responded to the President’s request of exploring the question whether American officials have the right to use torture against suspected terrorists. Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee of the Office of Legal Counsel not only legalized the use of torture for U.S. officials but also defined torture in the narrowest way. He defines torture as inflicting physical pain, or any serious physical injury such as failure of organs or at the most
In “The Case for Torture”, philosophy professor Michael Levin attempts to defend using torture as a means to save lives is justifiable and necessary. Throughout the article, Levin provides persuasive arguments to support his essay using clever wording and powerful, moving examples. However, the essay consists heavily of pathos, fallacies, and “What if?” situations that single out torture as the only method of resolution, rendering the argument hypothetical, weak, and unreliable for the city of San Jose as a whole community to follow.
Many believe that those who plan on committing horrible crimes should be tortured in order to find out information on their plans. One of these people is Michael Levin. In his 1982 article “The Case for Torture.” Levin argued whether or not torture was wrong in any situation or not. Levin begins building his credibility by citing convincing facts and successfully employing emotional appeals. However, toward the end of the article, Levin makes it clear he wants his audience to come up with their own conclusion on torture.
The practice of torture by United States officials has become one of the most controversial elements of military history. The debate of its use in gathering intelligence has been particularly prevalent since the Bush administration. Most recently, a detailed and graphic scene of torture was presented in the movie Zero Dark Thirty. Proponents for the use of torture state that it is necessary for intelligence gathering and that ethics should be waved aside. Opponents argue that it is not becoming of American practices and it is not a reliable source for intelligence gathering. The public debates on this issue have forced policy makers and military officials to look at whether or not torture, particularly waterboarding, should be legal. The
The notion of “authorization” as permitting the existence of torture is apparent in the fact that though an individual may “theoretically, . . . [have] a choice” to refrain from such activity, “given the situational context . . . the concept of choice is not even present”; disobedience to the dictates of authority means “punishment, disgrace, humiliation, expulsion, or even death” (196). Therefore, one is freed from moral unease by the fact that he may feel trapped and unable to act against his superiors, as retaliation would be imminent. In some instances, as was demonstrated by
Malcolm X said, “The media is the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” This statement was made about media over forty years ago, so is it possible for a young adult in today's society to escape the control of media? Media is everywhere, therefore young adults are subject to see and utilize it on a daily basis! Young adult's decision on what to wear, what to eat, what to love, and what to fear is based on media influence. These influences that the media has on young adults are not positive and there are various reasons why. Media is massive in itself, therefore it comes in many forms and these forms have created an unsound reality for young adults. Media is used to communicate messaging and those that are negative directly affect young adults.