28 July 2010
To Torture or Not?
After the United States suffered terrorist attacks on September 11th 2001, the well being of our nation would be of great interest to the Bush Administration. Anything and everything has been done to ensure that such an attack that does not occur on American soil ever again. Our military activity in the Middle East allows us to have the opportunity to catch enemy prisoners and the ability to retrieve valuable information in order to end the war on terror. Some may believe that the use of torture may be the most effective way in obtaining information from enemy prisoners, but how effective is this method? There has been an ongoing argument whether the use of torture should or should not be used in order to obtain information. In John Mcain’s essay Torture’s Terrible Toll, he argues that torture should not be used in order to retain information, while Mirko Babaric’s “A Case for Torture,” explains that torture is applicable in order to save an innocent person’s life. While both may pose valid arguments, torture is still perceived by society as an irrational way to get the answer you are looking for. With that said, the use of torture by American soldiers on enemy prisoners during a time of war should never be used because it is ineffective, produces unreliable intelligence and a loss of credibility in American democracy.
It is said that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. In today’s war on terror, you many think that torture may be the most effective way to obtain information’s when enemy prisoners are captured. Torture is defined to be as intense feelings of suffering. This may probably the worst state of conditioning one can be placed in. When one is being tortured, there first priority is to stop the aggressor from torturing and will say just about anything to end any further physical and psychological damage that he or she is doing. (McCain) Putting that into perspective, there is...