Should Our Society Endorse Torture?

I hope not. But Getmo had no torture in any case.

Published on June 15, 2005 By greywar In Politics

(Update Version 2.0 : Wanderer's take on this can be found here and I think I finally got that last pesky misspelled instance of "toture" out of this article)

(Update : Torture is insanely difficult to type correctly. I think I got them all now but if not, tough.)

There is going to be a lot of political hay made about the torture occuring at Getmo for months to come and rightly so as the nation has a need to decide on what our torture policy really is. I for one oppose torture under any circumstances. Period. That being said let me finish with this : What happened at Getmo is not torture. It isn't even close to torture. I do not exaggerate when I say that my Boy Scout Initiation Hazing was more rigorous than the treatment TIME outlines here.

I would love to write a pithy commentary on this but I don't have the time or money for the net right now (AAFES can kiss my ass) so I will simply link to Lileks incredible excoriative Fisking of the wretchedly written TIME "piece" here.

Go read them both and then let me know if you think that the treatment in the TIME article constitutes "torture" and also whether you favor torture use in intelligence gathering and if so under what circumstances.

My answers would be :

No. (not even close to torture... go read some real Gulag stories for context)

No. Sinking to torture is unamerican (IMHO) and is an even more slippery slope than censorship.

and None. Ever. Not as a governmentally sponsored activity.

Personally? If I as JoeCitizen had the opportunity to torture a pedofile or rapist in order to save a life (or simply for revenge) I would happily show them just how useful a vivid imagination can be for the creative application of pain. Doing so would make me a criminal of course but Society can not afford to start condoning institutionalized torture (down that path lies madness) so I accept that criminalization.

P.S. Apparently Wanderer is on The Hard Road tour of America's Seediest Truckstops once more. If he makes it three posts in a row I might even re-blogroll him

Comments (Page 2)

chiprj

on Jun 15, 2005

At what cost? I would rather sacrifice a little of my morality than ANY of my children. How bout you? Is your morality more precious than your family? Your friends? Your fellow citizens?A lot of people talk about the high ground, but I would be willing to bet that if they were in a room with a terrorist that had information that could prevent the deaths of loved ones, not just stuff you watch on the news, but loved ones, then I bet their morality would go on a downward spiral very quickly.

Part of the problem would not be whether you, or any other civilian, would be willing to sacrifice the high ground. You may be able to live with the thought of our Soldiers using torture to gain information. What about the Soldier? "Do it for your country!" Does it make you a bad Soldier if you're not willing to live with it? Either individually or as a nation?

The military is a noble institution that holds its service members to very high standards. It has become easy to pull out the mistakes and show them to the public, but the fact is, the Army's training programs for many areas, to include EO, prevention of sexual harassment, and consideration for others to list just a few, are being copied by some of the largest companies in the country. They work. And that is a selling point when recruiting. You will be treated as a human being, just as you are expected to treat others that way.

What would we be telling the youth of our country? Make no mistake, human intelligence gathering is being done at the lowest (youngest) level, very often out of necessity. Do we really want to appeal to our high school and college students with thoughts of taking out their hostilities on another human being in such a personal and physical manner? There is a big difference between fighting a close combat war and torturing a bound prisoner.

We signed the Geneva Convention. We are bound to it. I am not comfortable with the idea of pulling out of it. Regardless of our enemies actions. Period.

I do not support the use of torture. I am a Soldier.

Having said that, there is a difference between interrogation techniques and torture. I think that is the point greywar may be trying to show with his links.

MasonM

on Jun 15, 2005

There is a big difference between fighting a close combat war and torturing a bound prisoner.

We signed the Geneva Convention. We are bound to it. I am not comfortable with the idea of pulling out of it. Regardless of our enemies actions. Period.

I do not support the use of torture. I am a Soldier.

Having said that, there is a difference between interrogation techniques and torture.

I agree 100% and thanks for making those points.

Texas Wahine

on Jun 15, 2005

chip: I'd give you a million insightfuls for that if I could.

ParaTed2k

on Jun 16, 2005

I've never really liked Rap music, but this is the first time I ever heard liberals calling it "Torture"! ;~D

Sen. Dick Turban (D, IL) needs to remember who is protecting him... and who just might not when the bullets fly.

CoolAqua

on Jun 16, 2005

It itsn't just about torture, its about not charging people and holding them indefinitely. Thats why its called a Gulag.

Island Dog

on Jun 16, 2005

It itsn't just about torture, its about not charging people and holding them indefinitely. Thats why its called a Gulag.

No, actually it was about torture. Did you not read his "speech"?

greywar

on Jun 16, 2005

It itsn't just about torture

True but it is mostly about torture. Jurisprudence doesn't get that same zing with the readership

I'd still rather they were simply pumped full of whatever drug works best and then questioned if they get recalcitrant.

I agree cacto but Amnesty International considers the use of any drugs to be "torture" as well.

LW - Good points all around as the devils advocate but my blanket response to most of them and also to the posters who side with me as to the use of torture by individuals is this:

Once the government takes the first steps down the road to torturing foreigners they are that much closer to turning it on their own citizens as well. It is this slippery slope which must be defended for the sake of our children and it is why I oppose torture even when it's use could prevent another 9/11. Read that carefully. If I had the chance to prevent 9/11 by allowing the US government an official torture policy I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't want my kids to be subjected to that sort of society.

Coolaqua has a great addition to this with the dismissal of jurisprudence. Torture and no due process are a viscious one-two punch to the gut of any free society. That is why we have to maintain the moral high ground. Enlightened self interest. Insightfuls all round.

drmiler

on Jun 16, 2005

Without using the Amnesty International BS, show me where we're using torture on detainees in Gitmo.

greywar

on Jun 17, 2005

Without using the Amnesty International BS, show me where we're using torture on detainees in Gitmo.

if that is addressed to me perhaps you should re-read the article? Also note the "scare" quotes I used around torture in my previous reply. There was no torture in Getmo from what I read. That being said the whole article is about whether real torture should be endorsed by America as a society. Not sure what you are driving at there Dr.?

Dr Guy

on Jun 17, 2005

I wonder why the use of drugs such as sodium pentothal would be considered torture by AI? What reasons do they give?

I know why it is against the Geneva Convention, but I am curious as to why it is considered torture as well. Greywar, do you have any idea?

greywar

on Jun 17, 2005

I wonder why the use of drugs such as sodium pentothal would be considered torture by AI?

Just my observation but AI seems to beleive that all methods of interrogation beyond asking a suspect a question in a normal environment are either torture or at least unethical. AI is made is of folks who have a bit of an utopian mindset which is an admirable ideal yet and untenable reality. These are the same folks who beleive that if we just make nice that other folks will make nice too and refuse to beleive that there are legitimately untrustworthy people in the world. This view while naive perhaps certainly has an admirable purity to it.

Dr Guy

on Jun 17, 2005

Thank you for the explanantion. And admirable purity was what got 6 million Jews, 2 Million Cambodians and 20 Million Russians a fast ticket to the next plane of existance.

Myopic fools.

Sturgee

on Jun 17, 2005

Just my observation but AI seems to beleive that all methods of interrogation beyond asking a suspect a question in a normal environment are either torture or at least unethical.

It isn't just AI that views it this way. After first reading this post and early replies a couple of days ago, I went and actually read the Geneva Convention. According to the Convention, any type of coersion, mental duress, yelling, etc. is unacceptable to use against a prisoner of war. The key to all of this is the designation of a prisoner of war. The Convention has several entries to fully define a prisoner of war, and in my honest opinion most (but not all) of the detainees at GTMO do NOT fall into the POW category. They are enemy combatants, but not of a national, nor an organized militia under a defined command structure with a defined symbol and openly bearing arms. So, if they are not POWs, and the Convention doesn't apply as relates to intensive questioning, then the Convention should also not apply in terms of torture (at least in regards to the non-POWs).

The hard part is clearly identifying who is, and who is not a POW, and treating them appropriately.

Personally, I agree with Greywar about torture and how it's use could begin our government and society on a very slippery slope. However, we should clarify for the sake of accuracy the fact that these individuals (or most of them at least) are not POWs, and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.

ParaTed2k

on Jun 18, 2005

Strange how we didn't hear any whining from the left when the target of the loud music and bright lights were American religious zealouts in a little place called... WACO.

greywar

on Jun 18, 2005

Strange how we didn't hear any whining from the left when the target of the loud music and bright lights were American religious zealouts in a little place called... WACO.

it is very difficult to be completel;y devoid of this sort of selective blindness as humans unfortuneately.

I went and actually read the Geneva Convention.

something I probably should have done as well...

Very pithy points indeed there meladdo. The POW exclusion bit works it's way back into due-process and whether we as a society beleive that we should extend those same rights of jurisprudence to non-citizens. Frankly I think we must. That rates an Insightful for your comment.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!