Compaire and Contrast of Torture

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 people who see it the same way but also believe it could be necessary in extreme circumstances. We’re going to look at two different points of torture: When it is acceptable and when it is not acceptable. Let’s start off by asking the question Alan Dershowitz placed in his published op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Times on November 8, 2001; “Consider a situation in which a kidnapped child had been buried in a box with two hours of oxygen. The kidnapper refused to disclose its location.

He then asks “Should we not consider torture in that situation? ” Dershowitz puts together a very harsh question about something that realistically could actually happen to any one of us at some point in our life. To the family of this child, the answer would be clear. On the other hand, the interrogator might see that path as too harsh to follow. This is why the government needs to be the ones who decide hard choices like these. When times that require the use of torture come to light, the media tends to give life to an already harsh experience.If a soldier needs to find out where his fellow soldiers were taken, there are ways to get this information out of the detainee.

To some, the quickest way to do so is to bring the harshest aspects the subject fears to light. The subject would do most anything to get the torture to stop, so they give away the information. In some situations, this works wonders for the interrogator. On the other hand this can backfire because the detainee could tell the interrogator what he wants to hear, just to make the torture stop, whether or not the information given is the actual truth. So what are the good reasons and the bad reasons to torture?Some of the positive things that come out of causing mental and physical pain to a subject are: The subject gives up information, the information is acquired quite quickly compared to normal means of interrogation, and the only person who is harmed is the detainee. It is understand that some people would believe these choices are not valid enough reasons to harm another human being.

If it is seen from the side of the family member whose child’s life is on the line, then, yes, these are quite valid reasons. If a football stadium full of fans lives were at stake, than, yes, these would be considered to be valid reasons.The reasons some see torture as a vile thing to do to another human could be as follows: It is against our 8th amendment of the United States, “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” as well the information gathered could be false if the detainee just wants the torture to end, so they tell the interrogator anything. There is the possibility it degrades the mental stability of the interrogator. This can cause them to become cruel and narrow sighted.

There are a few who would bring religion into the debate. Sadly, this is not the case in most situations. Yes, the Bible and other forms of reference state that you should not harm another.Yet these same people forget to look at history, when the inquisition was sent out to find what they wanted to know.

Also during the times of witch hunts, suspects were tortured until they admitted that they were witches. In all reality most people see torture as being something that should never be done, even the people who see the value of torturing a suspected bomber or kidnaper. In our times torture is used less and less to get information that is needed. With medical science advancements that can allow the interrogator to extract information, without causing harm to the suspect will make torture a thing of the past.

One such advancement can be found in the book “Educing Information” written by the Intelligence Science Board. In this book they give ways of extracting information without torture. In conclusion, torturing suspects to acquire information should be left up to the government. It is their job to keep the citizens safe from harm, both domestic and foreign. It is also their job to keep the peace with its citizens. With new ways of getting information, governments should result less and less to torture.

So when the time comes to when it is no longer needed, that will be the times the world will be at peace.