The Use Of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques ( Eits )

After watching Frontlines documentary Secrets, Politics and Torture one is automatically faced with mixed views on the major issue, torture, discussed throughout the documentary. At first it shows the different ways our government tries to protect our country and national security, but as one continues to watch the documentary you see how our government attempts to manipulate rules and scenarios in order to help protect the CIA’s inappropriate behavior. On the one hand it is easy to understand why it was unnecessary to torture the prisoners we held captive, but in another light we must also understand the real reasons for acting with such cruel behavior.

The War on Terror has produced several different viewpoints on the utilization of torture and its effectiveness as a means to elicit information. A main argument has been supplied that torture is ineffective in its purpose to gather information from the victim. The usefulness of torture has been questioned because prisoners might use false information to elude their torturers, which has occurred in previous cases of torture. It has also been supposed that torture is necessary in order to use the information to save many lives. Torture has been compared to civil disobedience. In addition, the argument has been raised that torture is immoral and inhumane. Lastly, Some say that the acts are not even regarded as torture.

The definition of torture is perceived differently to every person. In this dispute, the two opposing sides are generally immovable. Many claim that it is not an effective tool, it is downright wrong, and it just does not work, while the other side claims the opposite. The argument “The Gray Zone: Defining Torture” by Barry Gewen examines the controversial issues that erupt from the touchy topic of torture. Gewen writes a successful and persuasive argument for his favorable position towards torture as an effective mean for gathering information and halting life-threatening situations which he does through his use of strong premises, logos, and ethos, building him a credible and structurally sound argument.

Torture is known as the intentional infliction of either physical or psychological harm for the purpose of gaining something – typically information – from the subject for the benefit of the inflictor. Normal human morality would typically argue that this is a wrongful and horrendous act. On the contrary, to deal with the “war on terrorism” torture has begun to work its way towards being an accepted plan of action against terrorism targeting the United States. Terroristic acts perpetrate anger in individuals throughout the United States, so torture has migrated to being considered as a viable form of action through a blind eye. Suspect terrorists arguably have basic human rights and should not be put through such psychologically and physically damaging circumstances.

For years after the terrible acts of 9/11 the United States Government used many different tactics to acquire information about Osama bin Laden and the terrorist group known as Al Qaeda, who was involved with them, and what they were planning next. The way the government, the CIA specifically, tried and succeeded in torturing its detainees was astounding and sometimes stomach churning as shown in the movie, Zero Dark Thirty, and it’s no wonder that President Obama reformed the laws and regulations that President George W. Bush installed and allowed the CIA to do. The second item about torture for military use was the reliability of the techniques and how often and how much information was actually acquired from

Since the terror attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, the debate of torture has increased significantly. The torture argument has become a defining component of the moral state of a country and how they approach certain situations. I will be exploring the ideas of Alan M. Dershowitz, who argues for a “torture warrant,” and Jeremy Waldron who draws the line at torture completely. Both make compelling arguments; however, the legalization of torture, I believe would result in the development of a more violent and less forgiving society.

The United States citizens have been wrestling with the question of, whether their government intelligence agencies should be prohibited from using torture to gather information. According to Michael Ignatieff, this is the hardest case of what he describes as ‘lesser evil ethics’—a political ethics predicated on the idea that in emergencies leaders must choose between different evils Before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, torture was viewed by most American’s as only actions that brutal dictators would employ on their citizens, to keep order within their country. However, this all changed when in May 2004, The New Yorker released photographs from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The disturbing pictures were released on the internet showing bodies of naked Iraqis piled onto each other, others showed Iraqis being tortured and humiliated. There was a huge up roar, which caused the President at the time George W. Bush to publicly apologize, and threaten the job of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Soon after, the CIA Conformed the use of waterboarding on three Al-Qaida suspects in 2002 and 2003, which further annihilated the topic. Since these reports, torture has been in the forefront of national politics, and the public opinion has been struggling to commit on whether torture is right or wrong.

Today we can say again in a loud and clear voice, the United States should never condone or practice torture anywhere in the world… America is at our best when our actions match our values… Yes, the threat of terrorism is real and urgent, scores of children were just murdered in Pakistan, beheadings in the Middle East, a siege in Sydney, these tragedies not only break hearts but should steel our resolve and underscore that our values are what set us apart from our adversaries (“Should Interrogation Techniques”).

Torture has long been a controversial issue in the battle against terrorism. Especially, the catastrophic incident of September 11, 2001 has once again brought the issue into debate, and this time with more rage than ever before. Even until today, the debate over should we or should we not use torture interrogation to obtain information from terrorists has never died down. Many questions were brought up: Does the method go against the law of human rights? Does it help prevent more terrorist attacks? Should it be made visible by law? It is undeniable that the use of torture interrogation surely brings up a lot of problems as well as criticism. One of the biggest problems is that if torture is effective at all. There are

One of the most controversial topics in the U.S. has been Enhanced Interrogation techniques- also believed to be torture. These practices are said to be implemented on suspected terrorists to recover possible information of future attacks on America, although many have concluded that this practice was created out of fear after the attack on September 11, 2001 (What Motivated CIA Torture?, 2014). Some of these practices include sleep deprivation, stress positions and even insects inside of a confinement box. One of the most controversial of all of the tactics is waterboarding or essentially drowning. Abu Zubaydah, the Al Queda

Another player in this global debate of enhanced interrogation is the United Nations itself. In May of 2005, the UN issued an 11 page panel report on the adhearance of the United States to the anti-torture treaty. In the report the UN said that the United States should stop the process of enhanced interrogation saying that it was “nothing more than torture”. The US should stop its interrogations of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan by military and civilian staff and prosecute any staff found to have used any of the techniques specific to the enhanced interrogation. The UN report stopped short of admonishing the United States as the US “has a very good record on human rights” , (19 May 2006) Torture was banned by the UN in 1948, in its Universal Declaration of Human Rights of which not only is

Torture falls under the category of cruel and unusual punishment, however circumstance can sway the attitude towards the use of torture. The most prevalent example in society, as well as the one used in the article “The Torture Debate” by Philip Rumney and Martin O’Boyle is terrorism. Based on the information presented in the article I agree that a legalized torture system should be developed under specific

The United States government has issued a report detailing the use of “enhanced interrogation methods” that many have defined as torture. Imagine that, in response to this report, a bill has been introduced in Congress that would forbid the use of tactics that the bill’s sponsors have defined as torture, including waterboarding, excessive sleep deprivation, and solitary confinement, in American counter-terrorism efforts.

The practice of torture by United States officials has become one of the most controversial elements of military history. The debate of its use in gathering intelligence has been particularly prevalent since the Bush administration. Most recently, a detailed and graphic scene of torture was presented in the movie Zero Dark Thirty. Proponents for the use of torture state that it is necessary for intelligence gathering and that ethics should be waved aside. Opponents argue that it is not becoming of American practices and it is not a reliable source for intelligence gathering. The public debates on this issue have forced policy makers and military officials to look at whether or not torture, particularly waterboarding, should be legal. The

In the United States, one of the major methods in obtaining crucial information has been through the use of Guantanamo Bay. While many have condemned of the torture that is believed to occur there, not only does Guantanamo Bay comply with national and international standards, but it also complies with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions (Meese 1) which states