Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.- Andre Gide
Labeling "enhanced interrogation technique" (EIT) as torture is a troubling. By calling EIT torture, we are reducing the conditions of EIT to less than what we can be confident in reducing them to. In other words, torture may be necessary for EIT, but EIT is not sufficient for torture. We can create a hypothetical situation to explore the possibility of torture =/= EIT.Let's say that there is a serial killer with a penchant for nuclear chemistry on the loose. At a particular point in time, he has successfully caused mass economic and physical destruction with a new nuclear warfare development he has been personally developing for years upon end. In addition to development of his new weapons, he has been strategically planting them in locations maximized for human casualties. So intricate is his plan and so protective of his execution that he learns to never produce any physical blueprints plans or notes. Upon finally catching him, authorities are intent to cause a cessation to the destruction, but are unable to find any sort of information that may be helpful. The madman is, as expected and granted by his rights, completely silent. The authorities after exhausting all possibilities, have only one other route of possible solution, which is obviously still not guaranteed to produce information. The last possibility is an enhanced interrogation technique of their choosing.By definition, torture is forbidden because it is "wrong". But if you can condone EIT but still agree torture is wrong, EIT or waterboarding specifically is not equal to torture, regardless of the manner in which you reduce it.
I believe we, the average citizens, have no clue about the “techniques” the U.S forces use to obtain information. Often, these techniques are not performed under the U.S. military label. The U.S. government uses private companies like BlackWater U.S.A,. which exists today under one of its subsidiaries, Xe Services, due to all the bad publicity BlackWater had received. I am assuming we are all familiar with the atrocities that were associated to the BlackWater team. Given that they are a “private company,” they do not need to adhere to the same rules of conduct the U.S Government adheres to.According to Wikipedia, this year, “The Obama administration awarded Xe Services a quarter of a billion dollar contract to work for the U.S. State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency in Afghanistan.” So lets face it, we are a nation at war where everything goes. If anything, the argument should be about, why are we at war?Now, I am personally insulted and disgusted with any politician that has the capacity to stand in front of millions of people and firmly say that waterboaring is not torture.
Waterboarding as I see it is not an “enhanced interrogation technique” but a torture method. Waterboarding causes not only physical damage that can last months to heal but also psychological issues that affect the individual’s personality and that may continue to happen for years. This “enhanced technique” can even lead to death. Torture is illegal, unethical and immoral. The United States of America recently vetoed waterboarding (in 2007 by the Obama administration) and affirmed that it is torture, but there are still many politicians that believe that using this method is just a way of getting helpful information that can save the lives of millions of Americans and that this end justifies the means. (This is the case of presidential candidates Cain, Bachmann & Gingrich). I do believe that interrogation made to prisoners or terrorists captured, are really helpful when talking about national security, but I also think that any method that attempts against another human being’s life violates the Human Rights Declaration, the United Nations Organization’s reason for existing and the foundations of our country.-Armas, Randy-.
Any type of punishment that can cause death or psychological effects to one’s life is considered as a torture in my opinion. Therefore, I find it very offending to see how many different ways the powerful leaders are coming up with to end someone’s life by punishing them death, which they did not give. It is ridiculous how one’s come up with the idea of torturing an individual with an element that’s supposed to give life rather than pain. It is indeed unfair because such ways can affect the person’s lungs, cause brain damage and dry drowning with extreme pain from struggling against the restraints. Obviously, I see that punishment will be as harsh as possible just to teach others a lesson. But, they have not yet thought above and beyond about the meaning of life. I wonder if they would agree to have an action similar to this done to them. We all know the answer to that.
In my opinion, Water boarding is a kind of torture. It has become controversial for its use as a War on Terror interrogation tactic. Doing some research about this topic I found that Water boarding was originated in medieval Europe and was called: The Water Cure”. Water boarding dates at least to the Spanish Inquisition, when it was known as “tormenta de toca”. On Sunday, the President Obama said something that seems to be interesting and true at the same time: “If we want to lead around the world, part of our leadership is setting a good example,” Water boarding is torture. It’s contrary to America’s traditions. It’s contrary to our ideals”. We can suppose that Obama does not believe in the efficacy of this horrible technique but some of the candidates for the Republican Party seem to be in favor of this procedure. Republican presidential candidates Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann said that they would support the renewed use of water boarding, which Cain said he did not consider a form of torture. In other words, some of the candidates “are” in favor of this procedure, but the political consequences generated if they admit this issue would be bad for their campaigns. They should admit that they are not against the use of this technique, but they are not going to, because it would affect their own benefits.
Changing the name of something is just one of the tricks used by governments or anyone in power to get away wit doing what ever they want. The way they see it is that they have an agenda and they'll do what they consider "necessary" to reach their objective. In the dictionary tortures definitions includes suffering in it, so while water boarding may not kill you it will still put your body in a state of prolonged suffering because of lack of air. moral issues come into this kinda thing, next thing you know they'll start calling electrocution "shock therapy"
Labelling torture as an enhanced interrogation technique is simply a way for government to sugar cote what something is and put it in acceptable terms or society to agree upon to make it ok for government to torture. Yes these "enhanced interrogation techniques" have worked and provided good intelligence for the united states but it is still putting a person in extreme discomfort, on top of that most of the people being tortured feel that is betraying to give up any intelligence so we can only guess how reliable information is.Sean mcdougall
Very few people would ever consider supporting torture as a means to an end – even if that end is the “greater good”. We, as a society, hope to extract information from our enemies without having to resort to cruel and inhumane tactics (in accordance with our image as freedom spreading liberators of less developed countries). Like Gilbert depicted in his thought experiment, there will be occasions where strong, efficient interrogation techniques are required. This then will force us to look at a whole slew of various torture methods and actual interrogation techniques, after which, we can decide what techniques should be permissible. The most important, regardless of what techniques we choose, is to adhere to the policies and regulations we have in place regarding the matter. If we condemn torture and outlaw its use, then we must follow through and hold those who disobey the law accountable.
Waterboarding seems to be a very light form of torture. When I think of torture I imagine someone inflicting permanent bodily harm not just water being poured on your face. Torture is a terrible thing but like Gabriel Garbiso explained its a necessary and effective tactic. Anyone who's against torture probably doesn't understand that sometimes you have to do bad things for a good cause. I think waterboarding, or any other torture for that matter, can only be considered torture if its for entertainment. OF COURSE the government can't refer to their tactics as torture. They have to cover up the truth so that the public is comfortable with what they're doing because people can't handle the truth. What we as people fail to understand more than anything is that there cant be peace.
I do believe waterboarding is a torture, as long someone is suffering its torturing. It’s not only caused damage physically but also mentally which can last for a long time. It can lead to a disorder or death. People die from drowning so I don’t see why waterboarding is not a torture. It’s the same thing, just dry drowning; can’t catch your breath and water goes into your lungs. Even from taking a shower water went through my nose and my whole life flashed before my eyes. Waterboarding, someone two hands and legs tied plus a towel on his/her face with water pouring (who knows the speed the water pouring) is TORTURE point blank. Someone can’t at least survive real drowning, legs and hands are free to swim away so he/she would definitely won’t survive a dry one.
Giving it a euphemism to a word such as torture, by naming it "enhanced interrogation technique" is a move, that to some people may not make a lot of sense, or even feel effensive to someone's intelligence (my case). Just because they are naming water boarding we are trying to give anew label to something that is clearly a part of a bigger picture (torture).the troubleling part of this argument, is that they may be referring to waterboarding now, but in a nay close or far future, they cans imply pull something like this again, to any level they want, if they can take one torture technique and give it a diferent name, doesn't that mean they can simply do the same with everything they want? like not call an assault on another country soveringnity a "war act" but rather a "protective action" or take the same torture process, next thing we know they can be clling severing body parts another "enhance interrogation technique" rather than torture.it is very hypocritical to separate waterboarding as something that is not torture.To me torture could be justified at a very specific point in time with very special conditions such as the lives of thousand of people pending on a single guys tongue movement, maybe to a extreme mean to an end for the greater good, but to try to justify it by naming something different is just a despicable lack of ethics and morals.Hector Toranzos.
To be perfectly honest, I had to look water-boarding up on youtube, to understand what exactly this “enhanced interrogation technique” is. After watching just three videos, I formed my opinion. It is a torture. As mentioned in the class, and defined by United Nations, torture is severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, which is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining information from him/her. If there is anybody, especially a politician running for the president, that believes that it is interrogation technique, then I feel genuinely sorry for them. And again, as mentioned in the class, there are times when hundreds of lives could be saved by “interrogating” a suspect using any kind of torture, and this torture could be justified. Politicians should, but never will, call things by the proper names – they could call a median voter an idiot, campaign donations from corporations are bribes, water-boarding is torture. Period. On the lighter note, Business Calculus test could be also classified as torture, pain – most often headache- is purposefully inflicted on a student in order to obtain the results – information.Matej Kasala
Waterboarding no matter which way you put it is torture. The United States is such an advanced country that I don’t think we need waterboarding for anything. It doesn’t matter how extreme the matter can be. What’s wrong is wrong no matter which way you put it. To many countries we are a model country; to show them what we waterboard to find out a specific thing is just a shame; there is no reason to do so. It’s completely unacceptable. By defending waterboarding by giving examples to were it would be necessary is already degrading enough. For example, if Iran were to waterboard someone from the United States we would go ballistic and possibly start a war; so why would it be “ok” to do it to someone else. I read an article on successful interrogation methods and waterboarding wasn’t even an option. The first step is a psychological profile of the person; through this you determin the type of person he or she is. “Human beings tend to attach less importance to their own information when someone else demonstrates that he too possesses the same or related information.” This is a quote I snatched from the article. To me this is extremely true. Waterboarding is far from relating to someone. The best way in my opinion to interrogate someone is to do it the right way to get the most amount of information possible.
I defiantly think that calling water boarding an enhanced interrogation technique is misleading. I would defiantly classify it as torture, but at the same time I can understand why it would be necessary in certain situations. If it is certain that the person holds information that would save multiple lives than I think that water boarding is an understandable interrogation technique. I think that risking one life is worth saving multiple lives if it is certain that the person does hold the information. I can understand why politicians would sugar coat what it is due to the public’s response to blatantly saying that they are torturing prisoners of war. I do consider water boarding torture but at the same time I understand why it would be called an enhanced interrogation technique.
Changing or labeling waterboarding as an "EIT" or enhanced interrogation technique wouldn't hide the fact that it is torturing, anyway that you look at it. People say that it is a "positive" way of torture or professional way, but like I said before torture is torture. I think that there is no possible way that torture can be accepted in this society because of the fact that your putting a persons life in danger by attempting to drown them, while trying to get answers from them. The UN defined torture as "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him", and that is what some of our presidental canidates call a "enhanced technique" ? I don't think so. I hope that voters see pass all the lies and chose the right person.
They are clearly fooling themselves if they don't call "water boarding" torture. However I can see what I believe is happening. Sometimes when we know something is morally wrong we trick our mind into thinking its not. In other words we try to justify it. Is it wrong to torture q man that has hurt or considered hurting other people? is it wrong to torture a bad person? From a security perspective this is vital to national security. The U.S have intercepted many potential attacks by torturing terrorists for informations. Is it right I believe, the millions of lives saved would agree that it was necessary. You have to wonder could there have been another way? I think sometimes you have to do what you have to do, an immoral act will be justify by another moral one. In this case protecting the millions of people from the terrorist is the moral act. You have to fight fire with fire. Water boarding is torture, is it wrong? The jury is still out. I think its necessary. I also believe that the human uncounsiousness tries to protect the mind from what is bad and that is way sometimes we pretend something is not what it is.That is not wrong or right its human behavior. Kathryn Pepin
Enhanced, and improved are all words that are used for “cover-up”, calling waterboarding an enhanced technique is ridiculous. I personally do believe Cain and Bachmann are in favor of torture, however, they will never admit to the public that they support torture techniques because it will not be of advantage to them; they will sugar-coat their words so everything they say sounds ideal. In my opinion, waterboarding is torture and it shouldn’t be used by the US government, it is unethical, and it makes us (Americans) seem like we have a corrupted regime. It can also be ineffective because there is a big chance the person can die whilst subject to this, as they can choke and even drown. We are such an advanced country that I’m sure there are different methods that will not consist of such type of suffering to an individual.
Christian Arias, Some nations are the world use torture to obtain valuable lifesaving information. This very act to some people is plainly unethical, yet many people or for it. Myself, I believe that torture or waterboarding torture should be used. However, it should not be used whenever or however, it should be used with the enforcer is definite that the suspect has valuable information. Also, it should not be used on a regular crook but people such as terrorist or enemy soldiers. People whom the government thinks are suspicious should not be terrorized with this torture, because they might have been given the wrong information. Although waterboarding torture might be cruel, it is sometimes necessary to help keep the safety of a country’s citizens.Accordingly, there is no need to disguise the name of waterboarding torture as an enhanced technique. Republicans Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich cannot admit that they are in favor of torture. They believe that waterboarding is an enhanced technique. According to the United Nations Convention, “torture is any act which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person, information or a confession.” If torture is causing severe mental or physical pain to obtain information, then waterboarding is torture. I believe that since these candidates Cain, Bachmann, and Gingrich are unwilling to accept that they are pro torture then should not have the right to the shot at presidency.
The problem with calling torture "enhanced interrogation technique" is that it is just a simple way to take the focus away from the issue. If we were arguing about what to call something we stop arguing about the activity itself and focus on what we should call it. Nobody likes the idea of torture that's why its always trying to be justified. But if we stop calling it torture and we start call it something else like maybe hamburger time or (EIT) then we stop talking about torture and we start arguing about semantics. It's the same thing as calling child abuse disciplining. We can try to define either or both, but the truth is that it just serves as a distraction from the real issue. People are being held against their will and are being treated brutally and inhumanely for reasons that are not very clear. Most politicians realize this problem so if they say "I'm in favor of torture" that means its okay to inflict outright cruelty on human beings as far as their concerned. So making up a euphemism like EIT sounds much better because its not torture per se and you can argue you all day long about what the semantics entail.
Waterboarding an enhanced technique? I think some think that we are stupid because if not how do you explain that they wanted to us to think that waterboarding is not a way of torture? Here I’m not discussing if it is good or bad neither if we should use it these method to get information or not, I am only saying that we must call things by their name. “The end justifies the means” if they wanted us to accept their behavior or accept the exception to their beliefs (that they don’t agree with the torture)They should give us a convincing justification about why they are doing it; we may or not accept. If we know the meaning of torture “Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession… by UN Convention Against Torture” we obviously know that waterboarding is torture.GEOVANA VAZQUEZ
Post a Comment