Is torture necessary?

[dnnydllr]

admit you are a terrorist... admit you are a witch and a heretic

People will agree to and admit anything under the right torture, which doesnt mean what they are saying is actually the truth.

I would of hoped humanity had progressed beyond medieval barbarity by the 21st century

The only people they'd be torturing would be people they knew were terrorists, who they believed had information that could save many lives. I think in that situation, you certainly have to do whatever you can to get it out of them. Better them suffer then for thousands of innocent people to lose their lives.

 

[xChevelle24]

Eh, I think that torture is torture, people are going to do it to us so why not do it back? But thats just my 2 cents.

 

[Grumman]

It gets results I suppose.

No, it doesn't. Find any expert on interrogation, and they'll tell you that torture's worse than useless for finding information. It's only the amateurs who aspire to be the next Jack Bauer who pretend that this isn't true.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

The problem with torture is that a tortured man tells you everything you want to hear, not because it's true, a lie or even his beliefs, he tells you it because it will make you to stop.

People who use torture as means of gathering information aren't looking for the culprit, just someone who they can use as a scapegoat, so they can say they're doing their job.

 

[PAGEToap44]

It gets results I suppose.

Well I'm obviously wrong. Didn't really think about it much when it was posted. Thanks for pointing out it's wrongness everyone.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

IT DOES NOT WORK

The SAS don't think it works, MI6 don't think it works, hell- even the CIA don't think it works. Only the US Military 'Intelligence' thinks it works, and when was the last time they got something right*.


*I jest. They've obviously gotten things right before. We just never hear about it. But still, I'd trust MI6 over them.

 

[Chipperz]

Won't take drugs if the punishment is having your arm hacked off. Wouldn't murder if the penalty was being left to the crows in a cage to be eaten alive.

Funny, one of the things I heard about Americans invading Middle Eastern countries was to do with stopping just that kind of treatment of people. 'Course, that might have been a "misquote" - I've heard so much crap that probably isn't true about Iraq over the last few years that it all just runs in together now...

 

[Trivun]

I don't agree with torture. It's stupid and unnecessary. However, although I realise people will say anything to make the pain stop, I think that it isn't a breach of human rights when used against people who have already been convicted of some serious crime or another since any serious criminal should instantly lose their human rights (in my opinion).

 

[Zhalath]

I believe it's morally wrong to torture people. Sure, you may be able to save lives, but at the cost of your own virtue. Then, are you any better than the people you torture?
"You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
-Harvey Dent

 

[annoyinglizardvoice]

admit you are a terrorist... admit you are a witch and a heretic

People will agree to and admit anything under the right torture, which doesnt mean what they are saying is actually the truth.

I would of hoped humanity had progressed beyond medieval barbarity by the 21st century

The only people they'd be torturing would be people they knew were terrorists, who they believed had information that could save many lives. I think in that situation, you certainly have to do whatever you can to get it out of them. Better them suffer then for thousands of innocent people to lose their lives.

You're assuming that they are all terrorists. These people may have been captured by the same sorts of people who airstrike civilians because they've mistaken fireworks at a wedding for anti-aircraft weapons being fired at them. People can just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. There's too much scope for mistakes to be made to justify this treatment.

 

[Zorg Machine]

Torture away as much as you want but a) be sure they know what you want them to tell you and b) for the love of god don't let it get to the ears of the public........EVER.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Torture is pointless. Just about every study done about it shows it doesn't work.

All you get is what you want to hear. The truth cannot be obtained with any degree of reliability using torture.

(and polygraphs are pretty dubious too. But that's an entirely different issue.)

 

[Avatar Roku]

I'd quite like to torture anyone who breaks the law, reguardless of crime. That'll certainly put the fear back into criminals. Won't take drugs if the punishment is having your arm hacked off. Wouldn't murder if the penalty was being left to the crows in a cage to be eaten alive. Wouldn't steal if the punishment was having all your fingers smashed with a hammer.

Torture isn't about gathering information or persuading people. It's about showing your enemies just how bad an idea it is to mess with you. It's not a method, its a CONSEQUENCE.

That's seriously fucked up, but closer to the truth. I dislike torture completely, but at least you see that it can't be used for info. Problem is, neither is it a deterrent. I mean, now all our enemies can just point at us and say "Oh look, we told you they're evil, they torture people. Join us in fighting them!"

admit you are a terrorist... admit you are a witch and a heretic

People will agree to and admit anything under the right torture, which doesnt mean what they are saying is actually the truth.

I would of hoped humanity had progressed beyond medieval barbarity by the 21st century

The only people they'd be torturing would be people they knew were terrorists, who they believed had information that could save many lives. I think in that situation, you certainly have to do whatever you can to get it out of them. Better them suffer then for thousands of innocent people to lose their lives.

Problem is, any info they give you under torture is entirely unreliable. Torture just straight-up doesn't work.

 

[Drummerstixz]

Torture is flawed for the very reason that it works.
For instance:
Justification=TORTURE IS NECESSARY IN THAT AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PAIN, THE INDIVIDUAL(s) WILL REVEAL THE INFORMATION TO END THE PAIN(pain being contextual here).

Reality=The individual being tortured will do/say whatever it takes to make the pain stop.

By this obvious flaw in logic when it comes to gathering reliable "results" after torture, the point on whether torture is "right" is moot. We should NOT torture, because the best way to defeat an enemy that hates you, is to give them no reason to hate.

*Edit* Damnit, i was gonna be first post when i wrote this >.<

Very good point. I think the way the government handle the war in Iraq was so ridicules that Americans were hated even more, I would think we would stop and think about how we handle all this after it came out that we would drop bombs...then food...I think that just made everyone hate America even more, Its like a parent hitting a child but then telling them I Love You rite away...then hitting them again.

 

[Frank_Sinatra_]

I don't believe it will get you information you want. The inherent flaw with torture is the person will lie to make the pain stop.

Off Topic:

"You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
-Harvey Dent

I don't think you got the point that Batman the hero had to become the villain for the good of the people.

 

[dnnydllr]

admit you are a terrorist... admit you are a witch and a heretic

People will agree to and admit anything under the right torture, which doesnt mean what they are saying is actually the truth.

I would of hoped humanity had progressed beyond medieval barbarity by the 21st century

The only people they'd be torturing would be people they knew were terrorists, who they believed had information that could save many lives. I think in that situation, you certainly have to do whatever you can to get it out of them. Better them suffer then for thousands of innocent people to lose their lives.

You're assuming that they are all terrorists. These people may have been captured by the same sorts of people who airstrike civilians because they've mistaken fireworks at a wedding for anti-aircraft weapons being fired at them. People can just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. There's too much scope for mistakes to be made to justify this treatment.

You need to realize that few people captured were tortured...and as far as air strikes for fireworks being mistaken as missiles? I really doubt it. The military isn't stupid.

 

[dnnydllr]

I'd quite like to torture anyone who breaks the law, reguardless of crime. That'll certainly put the fear back into criminals. Won't take drugs if the punishment is having your arm hacked off. Wouldn't murder if the penalty was being left to the crows in a cage to be eaten alive. Wouldn't steal if the punishment was having all your fingers smashed with a hammer.

Torture isn't about gathering information or persuading people. It's about showing your enemies just how bad an idea it is to mess with you. It's not a method, its a CONSEQUENCE.

That's seriously fucked up, but closer to the truth. I dislike torture completely, but at least you see that it can't be used for info. Problem is, neither is it a deterrent. I mean, now all our enemies can just point at us and say "Oh look, we told you they're evil, they torture people. Join us in fighting them!"

admit you are a terrorist... admit you are a witch and a heretic

People will agree to and admit anything under the right torture, which doesnt mean what they are saying is actually the truth.

I would of hoped humanity had progressed beyond medieval barbarity by the 21st century

The only people they'd be torturing would be people they knew were terrorists, who they believed had information that could save many lives. I think in that situation, you certainly have to do whatever you can to get it out of them. Better them suffer then for thousands of innocent people to lose their lives.

Problem is, any info they give you under torture is entirely unreliable. Torture just straight-up doesn't work.

If tortured didn't work, they wouldn't use it. Again the military's not stupid, and most of them don't enjoy the inflicting pain on others. They do get answers, and most of them are good ones. Yes, some people might be able to tell a lie under these circumstances, but few could.

 

[electric_warrior]

like all things it depends on the circumstances; if there is someone they suspect of being a terrorist and torture them into confessing to being a terrorist then that is wrong. If, however, there is incontrevertible proof that said person is a terrorist, then torturing them to get information on organisations and plots is probably alright.

 

[Drummerstixz]

Won't take drugs if the punishment is having your arm hacked off. Wouldn't murder if the penalty was being left to the crows in a cage to be eaten alive.

Funny, one of the things I heard about Americans invading Middle Eastern countries was to do with stopping just that kind of treatment of people. 'Course, that might have been a "misquote" - I've heard so much crap that probably isn't true about Iraq over the last few years that it all just runs in together now...

Yea unfortunately the American military always uses that excuse... Im still trying to figure out how we went from a war on terrorism against Bin Laden to invading Iraq and taking out Saddam...(If there was a valid reason please let me know, im not sure )

 

[CrazyMofo]

I'd quite like to torture anyone who breaks the law, reguardless of crime. That'll certainly put the fear back into criminals. Won't take drugs if the punishment is having your arm hacked off. Wouldn't murder if the penalty was being left to the crows in a cage to be eaten alive. Wouldn't steal if the punishment was having all your fingers smashed with a hammer.

Torture isn't about gathering information or persuading people. It's about showing your enemies just how bad an idea it is to mess with you. It's not a method, its a CONSEQUENCE.

Ok I don't agree with torturing anyone who breaks the law because then everyone would be well and truly buggered (speeding, jaywalking, parking offences - we've all done it). But for the bad things I agree.

No, does the death penalty deter crime? Of course not. Your logic is so fucked i cant even begin a proper rebuttal. You dont fight something with fear, that leads to escalation. If you have a law enforcement brutalizing criminals then it becomes and eye for an eye type situation. Look towards the middle east and see what kind of happy go lucky society that created.

Hello! Anybody home? Look at what you wrote before you claim someone else's logic is fucked. "You don't fight something with fear". The entire legal system is based around fear. You do crime you go to jail/get fine/whatever. If people weren't afraid of going to jail then people would be killing and raping left right and centre.

I assume you are one of those people who starts banging on about human rights if a criminal is smacked around by the police a bit. Ohes noes their human rights are being violated. Ever stopped to think about the human rights of the person they just killed/raped/mugged?

And what are you saying about the Middle East? Apart from the fundamentalist wankers (and lets be honest all fundamentalists of any religion are wankers - Westborough Baptist Church for Western example) Middle Eastern individuals are very respecting people and value honour very highly. Middle Eastern crime rates are so low BECAUSE of severe punishment. The US however has one of the highest rates of violent crime in all industrialized nations.