Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Maharbbal
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Is torture an acceptable weapon? Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 12:37 |
Lately many scandals appeared dealing with the use of torture and secret jails by the CIA all over the world. Some European government were more or less involved in this process (Italy, Poland and Romania). The neo-con hawks of Washington endorsed this actions while the EU and many NGOs stood against it.
What do you think about it?
Are these actions are morally wrong and hence strategically unecessary or are the human rights on the field of the War on Terrorism outdated just as the chevalric ideal used to be?
|
I am a free donkey!
|
|
Mila
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4030
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 12:58 |
The war on terrorism was a noble concept, but it is being implemented
in such a way that it is just a continuation and intensification of the
policies that gave rise to terrorism in the first place.
The war in Afghanistan could have stood to diminish terrorism, it won't
now largely because of the war in Iraq. Iraq will turn out to be one of
the greatest contributing factors to terrorism since the colonization
of Palestine. The war in Lebanon will further increase terrorism, this
is obvious enough.
The war on terrorism is what needs to be adjusted, and carried out in a
different way with more honorable and practical objectives.
International law, at least in this instance, isn't the problem.
Torture is and should always be illegal, and countries such as Egypt
and Israel - which are among the most notable offenders in the world -
should be prosecuted accordingly.
|
[IMG]http://img272.imageshack.us/img272/9259/1xw2.jpg">
|
|
Exarchus
General
Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 12:58 |
No, it always proved a failure. It's useless, for each people you torture, you make two more terrorists.
|
Vae victis!
|
|
Giannis
Baron
Joined: 25-May-2006
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 493
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 13:13 |
From a psychological view, the more you torture a person, the more he's losing his will for life, he just's want's his torture to end, and if he breaks he'll give you bad (wrong) information.
|
Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
|
Gundamor
Colonel
Joined: 21-Jun-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 568
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 18:09 |
Originally posted by Giannis
From a psychological view, the more you torture a person, the more he's losing his will for life, he just's want's his torture to end, and if he breaks he'll give you bad (wrong) information.
|
Not really. Under extreme pain you lose your senses and will be more likely to spill your guts. Also through the use of drugs you'll be under pain and all wacked out. They wont let you die. Its not hard for the CIA to get information out of someone. But most modern organizations or groups counter it easily by going off a "need to know" basis and one person doesnt usually hold more information then necessary.
Is it acceptable no. Should it be used yes.
|
"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind"
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 19:03 |
I'm with Senator McCain when it comes to the issue of torture. He's one of the few U.S. politicians who underwent torture, when he spent five years at the Hanoi Hilton. As he describes it when his torturers wanted the names of his squadron mates he gave them the front line of the Green Bay Packers at the time. Torture is an unreliable way to get intelligence and is immoral.
|
|
Maharbbal
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2006 at 20:49 |
So your general point is: "it is immoral because it is unusefull". Yet, why are they still using something that has been proven a failure. Are they stupid (yes it is a very likely option) or aren't we able to face the reality? Yet, Gundamor made a very good point: it is unlikely a nobody that gets caught be able to tell you more than the little he knows, no matter how terrible the tortures are.
Well I feel relived. Civilisation as we know it still have a few hours to live.
|
I am a free donkey!
|
|
Ildico
Janissary
Joined: 22-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 00:19 |
It's really sad how desperate soldiers get in a time of war as to stoop as low as torturing others to fulfill their duty.
Unfortunately there's not many others ways to deal with these situations, but it doesn't make it right.
I would endorse the *eye for an eye* theory, but then it would support the same act we should try to prevent.
My, my, we do have a problem.....
|
Beauty is in the eye of that guy behind the spontaneous diversions, set aside for a good explorer, telling a story about the world.
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 02:17 |
Originally posted by Maharbbal
So your general point is: "it is immoral because it is unusefull". Yet, why are they still using something that has been proven a failure. Are they stupid (yes it is a very likely option) or aren't we able to face the reality? Yet, Gundamor made a very good point: it is unlikely a nobody that gets caught be able to tell you more than the little he knows, no matter how terrible the tortures are.
Well I feel relived. Civilisation as we know it still have a few hours to live. |
My exact point is by torturing people you deprive them of some of their most basic human rights. And usually for information that can not be relied on.
|
|
Giannis
Baron
Joined: 25-May-2006
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 493
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 06:02 |
Originally posted by Gundamor
Originally posted by Giannis
From a psychological view, the more you torture a person, the more he's losing his will for life, he just's want's his torture to end, and if he breaks he'll give you bad (wrong) information.
|
Not really. Under extreme pain you lose your senses and will be more likely to spill your guts. Also through the use of drugs you'll be under pain and all wacked out. They wont let you die. Its not hard for the CIA to get information out of someone. But most modern organizations or groups counter it easily by going off a "need to know" basis and one person doesnt usually hold more information then necessary.
Is it acceptable no. Should it be used yes.
|
I followed a three week POW school, the first two weeks we were POW'S the last week we were the guardians. I've learned that if you want to take just one useful information you must succeed in three things:
1. Don't scare the hell out of them, they'll say anything.
2. Make sure that they'll never lose their conscience, stress tactic.
3. If you use force, don't make permanent damage. POW's that they think that they are gonna lose a limp or that you are going hurt them very bad are extremely dangerous.
To make a long story short, if you want to take some useful information, the only way is the interogation.
|
Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
|
arsenka
Samurai
Joined: 27-Nov-2005
Location: Russian Federation
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 104
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 14:33 |
Maharbbal wrote:
"Are these actions are morally wrong and hence strategically unecessary or are the human rights on the field of the War on Terrorism outdated just as the chevalric ideal used to be?"
Sorry, Maharbbal, I think your question is a little bit naive. What human rights and moral are we talking about? War is antihuman and immoral in its very essence. Waging war supposes adjusting the possibility to hurt or kill another human being for the sake of some (noble, superior) goal. Using torure is just a little drop in the ocean. I do not consider dropping bombs or using napalm to be more moral than this.
CIA...Hm...
They also have a goal: defending one group of people (innocent citizens) from another group of people that menaces the first one(terrorists, criminals and so on).
I've also heard that they are not too punctilious in their methods. Suppose that they are reasoning in the categories of quantity (and maybe of quality - who knows?).
I mean that from their point of view it might be acceptable to hurt or kill one person in order to save ten or twenty. Anyhow I suppose such philosophy to be highly immoral and pointless. I wonder what will they do if they have to kill one person to save another one. One.
Will they try to determine whose life is more vauable? And how will they do it?
|
arsenka
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 18:19 |
The moral problems of torture don't really bother me, but it isn't very effective. If someone is shoving pins under your fingernails, you're going to tell them anything to get them to stop. Torture just isn't a good way of getting information.
I suppose "psychological torture" could be more effective when used properly, but I'm not familiar enough with it to say.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Cunctator
Samurai
Joined: 12-Feb-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 16:43 |
If torture never works, why did so many Resistance figures in occupied Europe commit suicide while they were in custody? Surely some of them at least were concerned that they were losing the will and the ability to resist. And we should not ever forget that Stalin used torture to get his enemies to confess to all sorts of ridiculous crimes during the purges of the 1930s.
I am not sure anyone really knows if torture works or not. Doesn't it depend on the type of torture that is used, the nature of those who are inflicting it, and the purpose for which it is employed?
|
|
Centrix Vigilis
Emperor
Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 18:55 |
Originally posted by Maharbbal
Lately many scandals appeared dealing with the use of torture and secret jails by the CIA all over the world. Some European government were more or less involved in this process (Italy, Poland and Romania). The neo-con hawks of Washington endorsed this actions while the EU and many NGOs stood against it.
What do you think about it?
Are these actions are morally wrong and hence strategically unecessary or are the human rights on the field of the War on Terrorism outdated just as the chevalric ideal used to be?
|
=======================================
depends on your viewpoint indivdualy...moraly and as an adherent to your nations law base...but that begs the issue...your original question was 'Is torture an acceptable weapon' and the answer historicaly whether one likes it or not... until the later stages of the 19th century and the promulgation of treaties identifying/restricting/banning it in the 20th century was : yes.
this subsequent rexamination of it is basicaly paradoxical in my view not that I condone it personaly...i don't..but the bottom line is that states to a lesser or greater degree still use it..in varied forms..eg . solitary confinement etc.. in the penal codes.. as do individual violators of the law and terrorist groups and intelligence agencies to a degree...even though they may or may not be subject to criminal prosecution.
semanticaly i suppose one could justify this as 'interrogation'/ disciplinary actions...but the end results are basicaly the same..so yes... the answer to the question is depending on the semantics and degree of /type of /utilization... it might be found to still be acceptable.
It must be... it still being done....no matter the hue and the cry hence it's effectiveness is apparently still viable.
best
CV
|
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
S. T. Friedman
Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'
|
|
Dampier
Colonel
Joined: 04-Feb-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 749
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 14:08 |
Originally posted by Cunctator
If torture never works, why did so many Resistance figures in occupied Europe commit suicide while they were in custody? Surely some of them at least were concerned that they were losing the will and the ability to resist. And we should not ever forget that Stalin used torture to get his enemies to confess to all sorts of ridiculous crimes during the purges of the 1930s.
I am not sure anyone really knows if torture works or not. Doesn't it depend on the type of torture that is used, the nature of those who are inflicting it, and the purpose for which it is employed? |
Yes but the info Stalin got was made up.
Aside from that I imagine many Resistance men wanted to escape the pain. The sheer unreliability of many of the Marquis anyway makes another case.
|
|
|
Giannis
Baron
Joined: 25-May-2006
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 493
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Sep-2006 at 14:35 |
Originally posted by Dampier
Originally posted by Cunctator
If torture never works, why did so many Resistance figures in occupied Europe commit suicide while they were in custody? Surely some of them at least were concerned that they were losing the will and the ability to resist. And we should not ever forget that Stalin used torture to get his enemies to confess to all sorts of ridiculous crimes during the purges of the 1930s.
I am not sure anyone really knows if torture works or not. Doesn't it depend on the type of torture that is used, the nature of those who are inflicting it, and the purpose for which it is employed? |
Yes but the info Stalin got was made up.
Aside from that I imagine many Resistance men wanted to escape the pain. The sheer unreliability of many of the Marquis anyway makes another case. |
There is also a small joke about Stalin and the interogations in USSR:
One day Stalin lost his eyeglasses, he was extremely mad, because he wanted to read the ''Pravda'', anyway he called immediately the head of KGB and ordered him to begin inspections for his eyeglasses. After a few hours he found his glasses in a drawer and he called again the head of KGB so that he can postpone the inspections. KGB answered ''Thank god, general secretary, that you found your glasses, because allready 1 million people admitted that they had stole it''.
|
Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.
|
|