Why is torture so offensive to people?

I have a question.

For all emotional and practical (not legal or technical) purposes, other than the driving ideology of course, is there really much difference between a group of terrorists driving up to an airport terminal and shooting fifteen people with assault weapons, and a street gang driving up and doing the same thing to numerous people in a park, or on a street corner?

I ask this because the latter is exactly how the closest friend I ever knew in this life died. He was shot sixteen times in the back next to a video arcade. The people who killed him believed they were totally justified in what they did. The one who actually pulled the trigger was let out of custody due to a technicality.

The first post in this thread is partially (perhaps mostly) predicated on the notion that if torture could prevent the deaths of loved ones, and if terrorists killed our loved ones, we would see the value in torture. I don't want my friend's killer dead. I don't want him to suffer. I don't want him to be tortured. In fact, I hope he lives a long, happy life that is free of further violence (though that’s probably too much to hope for… but one can always hope in my opinion.) I would, of course, prefer it if he were behind bars, but only for society’s good – not out of vengeance.

I would therefore argue that the notion on which that post was predicated is not a universally shared point of view, and that for some, torture is impermissible in any context. I'm one of those people.

I respect the OP's opinion, though. I even understand it. I just can't find it within myself to share it.

reply to post by Res_ipsa_loquitur

---

Torture is not an effective mean to obtain a confession, anyone would say anything under torture...

As a way to punish is probably mere degrading to the one perpetrating the punishment than to the one tortured...

Thats why torture is so stupid...

reply to post by Res_ipsa_loquitur

---

The whole thing is a big lie our own countries, be it UK or USA are inflicting the fake terror on you, us and they are performing torture on the innocent. Timothy McVey was a brainwashed scapegoat for our government to cover something up, same as 9/11 and UK subway. They are succeeding because listen to yourselves. Thousands of innocent people hurt because Fake Terror makes you give up your constituional rights day by day, little by little. WAKE UP AMERICA PAY ATTENTION. The government has us by the balls. Hey did you guys know we are still a British Colony? ladyarwen

[edit on 16-5-2008 by ladyarwen]

Yeah, me too. I'm sure some facts were uncovered in this legal research. Some moral points must have been raised. I am right when I say torture is used by the most ignorant nations, right?

reply to post by AceWombat04

---

I'm terribly sorry for your loss. I feel I must outline that the contents of this post are as rational as I can get, and that might mean saying something that could offend you, and if that happens, please be aware it is not my intention, and I really do mean no ill will by writing this.

There might be a difference. Terrorism is a motive, not an act. It all depends on what both shooters in your scenarios was. If they simply meant to kill someone, then no, that is not terrorism. If, however, they meant to scare or coerce people into doing something, then yeah, that is pretty much inline with the dictionary definition of terrorism. And this goes for both shooters, and for anyone else who has ever used force against one or more people - it's their motive that determines whether they are acting in a terroristic fashion or not, not what they do.

Regardless, both shooters were murderers, and I hope the real-life shooter you talked about is aware of what they've done. Heartbreaking stuff.

Again, I'm sorry if this post has come across as anything other than neutral.

An eye for an eye and the whole world will be blind.

Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I guess most people find torture offensive mainly because of empathy.

My personal belief on why Torture should never be condoned is that it is a truly Medieval Practice - harking back to stinking pits otherwise referred to as dungeons whereby poor souls who may or may not have even been guilty languished for all eternity, in many cases simply forgotten about.

And of course, any change of scenery for them would have been a trip to the torturer's chambers.

I'm one step away from calling the practice Barbaric, you realise?

The simple fact is that you are torturing someone who may or may not be innocent.

And i'll not wish that kind of punishment on a man who did nothing wrong, no matter the perceived nessecity.

Do you really think that all those tens of thousands of prisioners in Guantanomo are all Guilty?

If we did this with a conventional prision there'd be a *snip* outrage!

reply to post by Res_ipsa_loquitur

---

wow, you apparently wouldn't mind then if they suspected you and hauled you into the torture chamber...because whats wrong if an innocent person happens to get tortured, right?...jesus, this thinking is still out there, and i won't even go into the countless studies done around the world for decades that have shown it doesn't work.

reply to post by dave420

---

No, not at all. I completely agree with you, actually. That's why I said "apart from the driving ideology." The goal of terrorism is, indeed, different than the intent in a typical murder.

My intent wasn't to compare terrorism to my friend's murder, but rather to compare the loss of loved ones in both scenarios, in order to make the point, essentially, that if I don't want my friend's murderer tortured despite the profound loss he caused me and my friend's family, then I can't rationally desire for anyone to suffer torture, under any circumstances. I only used that example because I can't imagine feeling worse than when he died, yet I don't seek or desire vengeance against his killer.

I respect the views of those who have a different perspective, and I actually understand their point. I could have easily gone the way of seeking retribution as well, and I'm not saying my way is in any way better. It's just not me, and I can't justify torturing someone to myself.


[edit on 5/16/2008 by AceWombat04]

I find torture offensive because I find violence done to a person who has no chance whatsoever to escape that violence offensive.

I'm assuming, OP, that you have no objection to torture. Where do you draw the line as to what's acceptable? Do we bring in a suspected terrorist's wife, rape her a few times in front of him? How about a child? Is that justifiable to you? They 'may' be guilty as well, you know, what with being so close to the suspect. How could they not know what he was planning?

Anybody who can bring themselves to torture another person is a retarded human. Not in the mental defect sense, but in the I-Stopped-Developing-Emotionally-At-The-Age-Of-Three sense.

Torture is offensive because it is unethical. Let's modify your sample and say you were blamed for the attack on the subway, although you did nothing involving it. They tortured you for weeks until you starved to death. Was that justified for the sake of liberty?

No. We just become the evil that we swear we are fighting.

reply to post by Res_ipsa_loquitur

---

And, as I am sure someone has pointed out, you're term 'terrorist SUSPECTS' should explain everything! The CIAs and other branches of governments experience in actually torturing guilty people has not been so good.

Just look at all of the Iraqi civilians that were riduculed and tortured, some to the point of permanent damage and even death, when they were innocent. Do you think that it is justified then that say, 90% of the people tortured are innocent but it's good because we got 10%? And then out of that 10% the odds of their forced confessions actually being true are very slim. Torture never has and never will work. People will begin to say whatever they feel the people torturing them wants to hear just so they will stop torturing.

Since you are so for it I guess when the day comes along and your children are taken away and tortured just to hit the odds you will say, "Well, it was for the greater good."

That seems to be the big stance of the neo-conservative movement. For the greater good. The ends justify the means.

Sorry, I don't buy it.

Maybe one day you will truly understand what has been going on. I hope that it happens for you. I really hope that you never experience what you are so haphazardly preaching.

Peace

You know these threads make me sick to my stomach.

As a person who lost 2 family members and 3 close friends in the 911 attacks I am deeply offended.

I find nothing wrong with torturing these terrorists.

I will volunteer to go to gitmo, abu graub, irag, afganistan, or anywhere in the world to KILL as many of these losers as I can.

I'm too old to join the military or I would have.

Now, let me be clear, it is easy for you folks to monday morning quarterback here - you have no Idea what the other survivors have gone through.

These people need to be killed. Every last one of them. They need to be wiped off the face of the planet. You have no idea what kind of fanaticism this is.

Yeah, So, I volunteer, anytime, anyplace, I'll pull the trigger on any one of them. I'll send 20, 30, 40, 50,000 volts of electricity through any of them.

I'll pull of fingernails - whatever.

There. I said it. Too bad...

Let them all rot in hell for what they've done.

What a bunch of losers

reply to post by tomfrusso

---

No my friend. I am truly and deeply sorry for your loss. It saddens me to see how angry and hurt you still are about this.

The big problem is this. You say that you can't see why torturing these 'terrorists' is such a problem. Well, the problem is that who is saying they are terrorists? Have you not seen how many innocent people left the system permanently damaged just because they were Iraqi? There are so many more stories of innocent people being tortured, some even dying, by our great soldiers than there are of any good information coming of it.

From what it sounds like you are saying just torture 'them' for the sake of torturing them. Not to gain any information at all but to just cause someone else some pain to make up for your pain. That makes no sense.

I am sensative to your loss. But I do know this. Torture just doesn't work. The only thing it accomplishes is that it gives the full right of torturing OUR sons and daughters that may get captured during times of war without any retribution. It brings us down to a lower, more evil level. It accomplishes NOTHING. It does NOT bring back our lost loved ones. I'm sorry, I feel for you but I must completely disagree with your reasoning.

reply to post by tomfrusso

---

Once again, I submit: would you be willing to rape a SUSPECTED terrorist's wife to maybe, MAYBE get information that maybe, MAYBE is accurate?

You may be too old to join the military, but you're not too old to fly to the middle east, get a gun, and kill as many of 'them' as you can before they get you.

Seek help. You aren't of sound mind.

Ace, Ace, Ace,
you were right the first time. There is no difference. Gangs are terrorists. Jesse Ventura is right, we are no safer and can never be safer from people like this. The war on terror should start at home. Get these fracking gangs off the street. Bush you piece of lying scum!
The real truth is that we are giving up our freedoms for the illusion of safety that can't be given.
Torture is for the weak minded. My nemisis "Res Ipsa II" aparently didn't learn anything from his 15,000 word treastie on torture if he has concluded that torture is effective for anything other than terror.
So, fight terror with terror, is that our motto now?
For any of you that thinks we are or can win a war on terror on foreign soil, why haven't we wiped the gangs out in our cities? Do they serve some economic purpose? If we can't put a dent in what they do, then how in the hell do you think we can do anything about them else where.
Hey ResII, where do you go to school?

The exact kind of blind patriotism your display on this thread?

I say to the OP... if you think torture is not morally or ethically questionable, let's suspend you from your wrists for a couple of days, give you a few hours of waterboarding, sexually assault you, force to wear women's clothing, let some K-9's loose onto you, strip you naked and pile you onto other men and apply electricity to your genitals.

Then tell us all how ethical and moral it is?

You DON'T fight fire with fire. You don't triumph over your enemies by becoming as they are.
We fight not only to protect our lives, but to protect our principles. To condone torture is to admit that America's forefathers who sacrificed their lives to establish a free nation were fundamentally wrong.

Do you also agree with notion? Didn't think so...

[edit on 16/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]