Water Boarding And The Truth Analysis

The government has been known to secretly kidnap people and kill or torture them. “In the years since 9/11, our government has illegally kidnapped, detained and tortured numerous prisoners” (ACLU). This shows how much power the government actually has. They have the ability to kidnap citizens and go undetected and under the radar. The government says that they are able to kidnap anybody if they believe that they could be a threat to the United States’ safety. This needless kidnapping goes against the constitution of the United States of America. There have been many times that the government has been caught torturing prisoners of war and possible terrorists. For example when George W. Bush was president there were multiple cases where the government was found out to have been torturing people. “Bush stood, the U.S. military ran the notorious School of the Americas from 1946 to 1984, a sinister educational institution that, if it had a motto, might have been "We do torture." It is here in Panama, and later at the school's new location in Fort Benning, Georgia, where the roots of the current torture scandals can be found” (Klein). Though it is illegal to torture prisoners on American soil, the American Military is notorious for doing it anyway. There is evidence of this happening on multiple occasions in multiple different places. Although, torture is illegal

The abuse of power transcended national boarders as the U.S. government turned a blind eye to American troops engaged in the unleashed and unchecked torture of prisoners of war. The use of torture is not in the national interest, as it has been found that the intelligence gained through torture is unreliable. Like the Japanese after Pearl Harbor, America consistently presses or even oversteps its Constitutional boundaries in times of national security.

The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.

The United States is considered one of the most powerful countries in the world. They have a well organized and trained armed forces. But, they were built with principles and moral standards. According to those rules, people could not do what they pleased all the time. The paper signed by the founding Fathers is, the Constitution of the United States, which prohibits the enforcers of the law to torture. Yet, it is still done. There is no straight statement that prohibits torture. An arguement of whether it can be legal or not is made, for the use of, retriving important information, the use of the 8th amendment and how 9/ 11 change some perspectives.

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.

Torture prevents terrorism. Advanced interrogation might hurt a few individuals with bad intentions, but it could lead and has lead to saving thousands of innocent lives for our national security. Running programs such as the one that the CIA ran for multiple years of advanced interrogation has done an incredible job inquiring important information fast. Yes, some people were wrongfully put through this system however 86% percent of suspects who went under intensified interrogation helped give vital information. That's why since post 9/11 majority of Americans believe it should be justified, stopping future attacks before they happen, and replacing the drone strikes to gather more information.

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

The use of torture as a strategy of war is as old as war itself. Torture serves a number of different functions. One of those functions is punishment for crimes committed, and torture is still used in this way to some degree. Another one of the functions of torture is to extract information or confessions. It is this type of torture that Alan Dershowitz and Ken Roth claim was, and still is, being used in the war against terrorism. Although torture violates the principles of the Geneva Convention, it is still used: "countries all over the world violate the Geneva Accords. They do it secretly," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). The use of torture can be " as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified"). This stance echoes the official stance of the United States after September 11, when the White House claimed that torture may be "justified" (Priest and Smith). The argument is simple: if torturing one person leads to information that saes hundreds or thousands of lives, then it is worth it. "We won't know if he is a ticking-bomb terrorist unless he provides us information, and he's not likely to provide information unless we use certain extreme measures," (Dershowitz, cited in "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified").

Since the tragic incident that occurred September 11, 2001 innocent and guilty prisoners have been captured by Americans and are being tortured. The camps and prisons they’re being held at are located in Guantanamo Bay. The Taliban and al Qaeda are the terrorist groups involved. This is important because America is torturing innocent people. Torturing terrorists is ineffective because it’s a violation of human rights, false information is given under pressure, and it gains enemies through abusive tactics.

Most of the controversy surrounding the use of torture is rooted in the ethical reasoning that is used to justify it. Before 9/11, it would have been incredibly hard to justify the use of torture or enhanced interrogation techniques on known terrorists and prisoners of war. The very idea of torturing another human being would force the American people to put aside some of their most cherished morals and beliefs, in a way that would render ourselves no better than the enemy and strip ourselves of the moral high ground. The culture of the United States, and other developed countries, made torture a longstanding unacceptable taboo and violation of basic human rights and dignity. Torture was an unnecessary, unethical, and unreliable practice that had no place in American policy before 9/11.

In fact President Obama released evidence of this in 2009 through a series of documents come to be know as the “Torture Memos.” Some of these memos document the capture, imprisonment, and torture of Abu Zubayadah. Abu Zubayadah was seized in a house raid in Pakistan by the US military. He was thought to be a high-level, active member of Al Qaeda. In thinking this he was brought to America, imprisoned and tortured. In reality he was not even an official member of Al Qaeda despite his minor interactions with them. He was also mentally ill. Through all the torture they put him through they received little or irrelevant information. He was captured in 2002, is still being held in captivity 11 years later and he has not even been officially charged with a crime. (Worthington) Not to mention in this time he had been subjected to a various number of tortures that were done without permission illegally. A memo was sent out requesting the authorization to use the following forms of punishment on Zubayadah: “attention grasp, walling, facial hold, facial slap, cramped confinement, wall standing, stress positions, sleep deprivation, insects placed in a confinement box, and waterboarding.”(Worthington). Ok so at least what they were doing at least was done with permission, right? Wrong. “A Department of Justice 2009 report regarding prisoner abuses reportedly stated that the memos were prepared 1 month after Zubayadah had already been subjected to the specific techniques

The enemy we are fighting is lawless and ruthless towards American soldiers and citizens. Yet the U.S. is too liberal to even torture mass murdering terrorists. Two-thirds of Americans say torture can be justified to extract information, says an online survey (Kahn 1). The key term here is justified. Our government has to define who is a threat and who is not. Once the imminent threat is defined then the government can deal with the threat rightly so. This level of support is similar to the support seen in Nigeria, where militant attacks are common (Kahn 1). The American public feels threatened and a stronger plan of attack to fight terrorism is needed. Two-thirds of the respondents to the online survey say they expected a terror attack in the next six months to a year (Kahn 1). The United States cannot continue to try and explain away problems. Terrorists are taking the lives of U.S. citizens but yet our country fears offending other nations if we use torture. People hold Harry Truman as a moral hero for dropping the atomic bomb but recoil at the thought of torturing one mass-murdering terrorist to stop the almost certain slaughter of citizens or soldiers (Buchanan 3). How has torture somehow become morally wrong when we do not even bat an eye at the thought of just eliminating the threat? Al Qaeda and ISIS have certainly not adhered to laws of war and have tortured and murdered American captives (Wynia 2). The United States is more than justified to use torture for the sole purpose of extracting information. “The higher law, the moral law, the natural law permits…(torture) in extraordinary circumstances,” says three-time presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan (Buchanan 2). With the threat of terrorism at an all-time high, this would be a time that permits the use of torture. The United States needs to send a strong message and the use of

Futuristic methods of tracking, investigation, and spying are constantly being created and information gathering continues to evolve. With such forward thinking technological advancement, it is almost jarring to see torture stand next to our other efforts. Torture is the world’s most primitive and vile method of information gathering, and it has gone on without proper attention for much too long. Nationally, torture efforts continue to be almost entirely unchecked and, even when reviewed, aren’t seen severely enough in the eyes of the public.

Considering Iraq and Afghanistan remain unstable and unpredictable, the risk of harsh interrogation techniques seems more plausible, “While Bush claimed ‘We do not torture’, his ongoing support for harsh tactics that amount to it, heightens the possibility that our soldiers will be tortured if taken captive” (Bush's Torture Policy). As a result, “To use such techniques puts the United States on the same level as the enemy, and virtually guarantees the use of torture on our soldiers” (Letter: Torture Policy). By being on the same level as the enemy, it brings the legitimacy of the United States under examination. “Legitimacy only comes when people accept that a government is acting morally, fairly, and within the ‘rule of law’ in its true meaning” (Pierce). On the other hand, some say that torture keeps America and their soldiers safe from threats and terrorist, “To call this a program of torture is to libel the dedicated professionals who have saved American lives.... To completely rule out enhanced interrogation methods in the future ... would make the American people less safe" (Cheney). However, with the release of the CIA’s torture documents, it could put Americans and their soldiers in harm's way. According to one intelligence official, “The Mideast is a tinderbox right now and this could be the spark that ignites quite a fire”(The Spark). Therefore, the harsh interrogation techniques that are used need to stop because it puts Americans and soldiers at peril, and the techniques simply don’t

Many of those detained in the military entrenched prisons inside Iraq, are subject to torture by one of many interrogators that are allowed to use any method necessary to gain intelligence on any of these two primary goals. The collection of the intelligence, was then used in many strikes against those who stood against the United States against the overall goal of creating a free Iraq.