Is torture necessary?

[Virus017]

I'd quite like to torture anyone who breaks the law, reguardless of crime. That'll certainly put the fear back into criminals.CONSEQUENCE.

But criminals generally do not intend to get caught when they plan the crime.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

I don't see torture as a reliable way of gathering information. Any idiot can lie to save their own skin, so there is no way to be sure that any info gathered is truthfull, accurate or valid.
Torture also cheapens any ideas that it is used to protect. No-one can honestly say they are fighting for freedom, human rights etc if they are actively abusing someone in this way. It's just hypocritical to the point of nonsense.

pretty much
think about it like this, if someone was keeping you awake for days on end, slapping you and putting you in bags with insects until you said something which sounded like useful info or admitted to being a terrorist, you'd do it just to make it stop wouldnt you?

even bouer couldnt last more than a month of psychological torture (of course he could last years of physical torture)

 

[Kirra]

Torture might not me necessary but it sure is fun.

 

[Drummerstixz]

Necessary?!? Is it necessary to drink my own urine? No but i like to anyway cus its sterile and i like the taste.

OT, torture is next to useless, it gets your hands dirty and produces no reliable info, get data the old fashined way, send in 007.

(cyber cookie for whoever names the movie reference)

Patches O'Houlihan--Dodgeball I love that movie!

 

[Glerken]

Well, considering it doesn't work. I'm going to have to go with no.

If someone comes near me with a knife, and I have no idea what they're talking about. I will lie my ass off. Twice.

I'm pretty sure there are ways to get better results. That are also less... well, barbaric.

 

[Drummerstixz]

Torture might not me necessary but it sure is fun.

Well Yea,like when you torture your BF/GF with the last slice of pizza but pretending to eat it slowly.....wait are we thinking of the same thing? lol

 

[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.

There have been many cases recorded where suspects being tortured admitted guilt, even though there was evidence that pointed clearly to another person. People will say anything to stop the pain.

Refer me to one of these many stories, and mind you I'm speaking of military cases.

Military cases? Why don't you name a military case where torture has been proven to work? Find a case where the subject admitted some intelligence, and the intelligence was corroborated by another source.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592/
Thank you, now refer me to one of these cases that you were speaking of...

"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,? Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. ?The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
This is the person who issued the memo, saying that the torture was not needed Effectiveness is moot when the technique is not needed at all.

As for my cases, I would refer you to The Innocence Project, a group focused on acquitting people wrongly convicted, through DNA testing. Some of these people were put in jail because of false confessions.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/

That has nothing to do with military...I'm saying nothing about people who are forced to say they are guilty by police interrogation techniques. And he didn't say it was not needed. In fact he more or less said there's no way of knowing whether it was needed or not.

 

[jasoncyrus]

I noticed a couple people stating that torture breaches human rights.

What theya re totally over looking is that rights apply only to people WHO OBEY THE LAW. Thats what rights were invented for to protect law abiding innocents from criminals. If you break the law you forfiet all rights. Thats how it should be. Hell frelling criminals in prison are living better than half the people in my street!

EDIT: Also to the person who quoted me suggesting the only for the bad crimes, I agree with that point, minor misdeamenors such as jay walking...(which doesnt exist in the uk)...or other tiny things like graffitti don't need torture...that'd be a waste of our torturers time.

 

[Susano]

That has nothing to do with military...I'm saying nothing about people who are forced to say they are guilty by police interrogation techniques. And he didn't say it was not needed. In fact he more or less said there's no way of knowing whether it was needed or not.

the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.
To me, that's saying 'We shouldn't have done it'

 

[Grumman]

I'm done arguing with you, as you don't seem to understand that they would not use a technique that doesn't work.

Belief does not define reality. This does not mean that the technique works, it just means they are morons.

 

[dnnydllr]

That has nothing to do with military...I'm saying nothing about people who are forced to say they are guilty by police interrogation techniques. And he didn't say it was not needed. In fact he more or less said there's no way of knowing whether it was needed or not.

the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.
To me, that's saying 'We shouldn't have done it'

That was not my purpose of quoting the article. It was that he clearly said that it did work...end of story pretty much.

 

[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.

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.

Torture does not work, which is why SAS, MI6 and CIA don't use it. The only people who think it works are those who watch 24.

As for them not enjoying causing pain...well, that's the only semi rational reason I can think of for them to be doing it.

I'm done arguing with you, as you don't seem to understand that they would not use a technique that doesn't work.

And you seem to not understand that there have been professionals in the intelligence business, including some of those who worked under Bush, who have come out and said that it doesn't work.

You seem to have a bit too much faith in our interrogators; both their methods and their motives.

 

[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.

Torture does not work, which is why SAS, MI6 and CIA don't use it. The only people who think it works are those who watch 24.

As for them not enjoying causing pain...well, that's the only semi rational reason I can think of for them to be doing it.

I'm done arguing with you, as you don't seem to understand that they would not use a technique that doesn't work.

And you seem to not understand that there have been professionals in the intelligence business, including some of those who worked under Bush, who have come out and said that it doesn't work.

You seem to have a bit too much faith in our interrogators; both their methods and their motives.

Then they obviously suck at their job. If you torture someone long and hard enough, they're going to talk. And I do have faith in our military, because they seem to be the only part of the country that doesn't suck ass right now....

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

Torture, in my opinion, is absolutely unacceptable on several levels- not only does it violate the precepts of the Geneva Convention that we all agreed we were going to follow no matter what happens, but it's unbelievably inhumane and doesn't even produce results half of the time.

As for the people who keep insisting that waterboarding and all that other crap isn't 'torture' and that they need to discover what the definition of 'is' is before they can determine whether or not 'torture' is actually a jailable offense, the Guantanamo Bay Torture Memos for Kids [http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-guantanamo-bay-torture-memos-for-kids/] would like to have a word with you.

 

[Delicious]

Is anything necessary?

 

[TheDoctor455]

Short answer: no.

Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

Is anything necessary?

Yes.

Why?

Because everything. *explodes*


Bonus points if you actually got the obscure reference.

 

[bad rider]

End of the day torture should never be performed and I really hoped anyone who okay'ed it and everyone who used it gets whats coming to'em. I mean at some point during this someone must have had a little voice say "maybe this isn't okay to do" and its a shame they didn't listen. Perhaps by setting an example it won't happen again.

 

[ix_tab]

Torture is never acceptable. Never. Not under any circumstances.

 

[DeathsAmbassador]

I am against torture, it's wrong to put someone through that, not to mention that torture has been proven completely ineffective, people will admit to anything just to make the pain stop. So no I don't think torture is necessary and I think it is absolutely horrible.