There has to be some TORTURE situations that are JUSTIFIED

I'm sure I'm going to make some people angry with this post but so be it. First I would like to say that I do believe in human rights, and this is all theoretical what I am saying. If we (the United States) actually found Osama Bin Laden should we be "caring and considerate" of his needs while he is being detained? Whatever your view, if you believe 9-11 was an inside job or not. Lets say that absolutely everything the media and U.S. gov. has claimed about 9-11 is true. That Bin Laden is the mastermind behind it all. Not to mention other terrorist attacks. Why shouldn't we torture this guy to get the proper information we need? If it was one of your own family members murdered on 9-11 would you be so concerned about the fair treatment of Osama?

Now I must say that I absolutely do not agree with every instance of torture. But if this is someone who we knew for sure was the perpetrator, why would you be so concerned about his well being? I am making this post because I just cannot understand why there are people in the United States who are more concerned about the fair treatment of insurgents, or terrorists that we do capture, than the ,families of 9-11 victims, or our soldiers families. It is your God given right to say what you want, have any opinion, and protest about anything. But I just want to understand, that's all. For the most part the people of the middle east hate the U.S. and the rest of the western world. Yet there are people here defending them. I don't get it.

While Iraq in my own opinion was a major mistake to occupy, we should have been more focused on finding Bin Laden and others. There are countries in the middle east we have spent billions of dollars on in aid so the people over there can eat, and try to make a decent life for themselves, and they still want to cut our heads off. I mean no disrespect in this post, I just want some other ATSers to possibly help me understand this whole thing. Please.

reply to post by MoreFunky85


If you say so, I bet you won't be saying torture should be justified if you were one of the 80% innocent Iraqi detainees who were being raped in abu ghraib.

reply to post by oozyism


Im talking about Bin Laden and legitimate terrorists. I dont agree with the torture of innocents.

Originally posted by MoreFunky85
reply to post by oozyism

 

Im talking about Bin Laden and legitimate terrorists. I dont agree with the torture of innocents.

Who ever you torture, doesn't matter, you won't gain anything from it.

Eventually you will start torturing innocent people.

Do you think the American government or the American army, or the American intelligence services agrees with the torture of innocents.

One of the main problems with torture is that the person being tortured will agree to anything and say whatever you want them to say just to put an end to the torture.
Therefore, the information recieved is worthless.
On this basis, it's not worth the effort. IMO.

What might torture do to a man who is not afraid to die?

"We absolutely got the wrong people."
-Michael Scheuer, a CIA agent who headed the agency's Osama bin Laden unit until 1999

"Sometimes, we just didn't get the right folks."
-Brigadier General Jay Hood, former commander of Guantanamo

Really?

I guess it all depends on what type of country you want to live in. I personally don't want to support a government that tortures. It doesn't help and there is no moral argument that can justify it. We talk about how barbaric the enemy is but the more we go to war with them the more we become like them. If we keep going down this path, if we do finally catch Bin Laden we'll behead him live on national TV.

What sources do you have to prove that most people in the Middle East hate us. The average person in Iran likes the US and loves Western culture. Just like everywhere in the world most of the hate is rhetoric by the government.

I remember reading a quote somewhere (i can't find it now) which (paraphrased) went like this: "The way you treat your prisoners reflects on you as a person (country)." I think that's very true and I don't think you can gain much useful information from torture. You can get someone to say anything if you apply enough pain in the right manner. Look at the "confessions" of so-called "witches" from the inquisition for just one example off the top of my head.

reply to post by MoreFunky85


how do you know they are innocent if you suspect them? you need to torture them a couple of hundred times untill your sure they have nothing to tell, well maybe another 100 times on top of that just to make sure. then we can tell he is innocent.

...........or he could just be investigated and have evidence gathered to determine his role or if he has nothing to hide, without having to torture anybody.

but then what if he has information that could be important even though he is innocent? better torture him another 500 times just to cover all possibilities.

where osama is concerned, it just depends what type of message you want to send, do you want to have revenge, and make torture o.k., or do you want to prove to the world and radicals that you are a better human being than them and will not stoop down to inhumane acts?

just depends on what those in power at the time of his capture think really. me personally think torture is just evil and has no purpose in gathering evidence, people will say whatever to get you to stop, so you would never be able to tell if what they said was true.

why not just use lie detectors? surely they are more accurate than torture?

if torture worked how come you still have not caught osama?

Lets have a cup of coffee with the people who eventually will arm with nukes.
I think war is wrong period, but if we go to war everything goes.
I'm positive that if we get invaded the enemy will show us compassion?

reply to post by MoreFunky85


What?

Are you just trolling for people to reply angrily at your OP, because if so, A++ for effort.

Torture for any reason is wrong, IF 9/11 was not an inside job (and it was) and IF bin ladin was the 'mastermind' behind all of the terrorist attacks you speak of, and we happened to capture him (even though we've had him on US ground numerous times...) torturing him wouldn't do any good - stooping down to the level, or lower than said persons level, just makes you as bad if not worse than that person.

Torture for the sake of retaliation is just wrong, torture for information is also pointless because those who hold anything useful within their evil little brains are usually taught how to withstand torture anyway.

I don't even know why I'm replying to this thread; I guess it's because I just am disgusted with the OP.

Go and attach some electrical wires to your man sack and then post on here and tell us how it felt - heck, grab a chain and whip yourself on the back while doing it, it will be a blast

How can we ever move forward as a human civilization if we continue to treat people is such deplorable ways? Do you not remember the golden rule? Obviously Osama bin Laden does not follow this dogma, but that doesn't mean we have to stoop to his level... I for one do not agree with torture in any circumstance because it is so degrading, to the point where the victim being tortured is no longer treated as a living being, just a slab of meat with information. That is no way to treat a cognitive creature in my opinion.

reply to post by MoreFunky85


You're missing the point entirely.

Torture under any circumstance is WRONG. It CANNOT be justified under any pretext. Those who you tell you that torture can be justified only have something to gain from it and it is never in your 'interest', only in theirs.

ANY government who tortures, murders and rapes detainees
is not different than the terrorists they hunt.

reply to post by HAMMERAX


obviously not, we all have to walk around believing that we all hate each other and should treat each other like scum, its the only way to stop war and make the world a nice place to live.


so what if innocent people get killed in the process, it will only create more people that hate us, and then we can kill them to!

I think we should throw torture supporters in jail.

We all know there are limits to speech; we cannot libel or slander or incite violence and we should not tolerate people using their speech to promote torture - which is a crime against humanity.

reply to post by MoreFunky85


Yes, I like the candle wax myself......

But seriously, I agree that torture is a tool of strategy, and it has long been used in war. I disagreed highly with the leaks on torture, it should not be discussed unless it is being discussed within the military. It is a tactic, if we go around letting our tactics, or rather the specifics of those tactics, be public knowledge then WTH?

Regulation of torture methods may be a neccesity, but should be regulated within the military corps, without public approval or disapproval.

I see that I have chosen the very unpopular side of this matter, I would like to say that I am a veteran of sorts, I grew up during the veitnam war and the turbulance of those times and now, all I wanted to be when I grew up was a tree hugger and hippie. I still think the world needs more love and that peace is the answer, and what I truly wish for this world is just that, lots of love and peace, and understanding and tolerance of each other. Unfortunately, that is not the reality of this world. The cold hard facts are that war has been going on since the begining of human civilization, and it continues and will continue, no country will ever 'win' or 'lose', it is a game that will continue playing no matter what, but the amount of lives saved by strategy, matters. There are times that torture may be the only strategy to save many lives, and yes it should be regulated as to how the torture is applied, but, torture does not end in the loss of life, it is to gain information, so no one dies and many get saved. Now I am going to go hug a tree.

reply to post by space cadet


sounds like medevil england, "sign the confession" "no! no! i am innocent god dammit" "o.k. boys crank it up a notch or two"

The problem with torture is the same as the problem with capital punishment:

Eventually an innocent person is going to be ruined unfairly and inhumanely.
I'd hate to be the innocent person who just became a statistic.

Well okay, almost all of us would agree that we should not use torture willy-nilly. A healthy percentage would agree that we should only use extreme torture in the most extreme of circumstances, etc. That is, assuming we can agree on a definition of torture in the first place.

Electric drill through the hand? No question.
Pulling out nails, or removing other boy parts. Of course.
Hold somebody's head under water for a long enough time to severely frighten? Probably
Playing loud music, or otherwise making people stay awake for long periods? Not too sure
Very long serial interrogations? I don't think so.

That aside, here is a scenario I would hope that most people would be conflicted about...as to whether or not torture of some kind would be justified.

Scenario:We know for a fact (just take it as a given for this example) that somebody has placed a very large nuclear device in the middle of a large American city. It is ticking down, we know that it will explode within one hour...but we do not know which city it is in.

We have just caught the guy who is carrying a hand-held device that can stop the countdown and render the bomb harmless. It requires the entry of a complex code, or series of codes to disarm the bomb. However, this fellow is not inclined to tell us the codes, or to enter them in himself.

What say you...oh wise ones of ATS? Stand by and do nothing, knowing that a few million innocent Americans will surely die? Or do we apply whatever levels and forms of persuasion we have at our disposal to try to force him to disarm the device?

It's your call...you can pretend to be Mr./Ms. President....