ipl-logo

The Role Of Torture In National Security

1837 Words8 Pages

According to redress.org torture is the intentional harsh physical or mental pain or else suffering for purposes such as causing fear or intimidation, obtaining information or a declaration of guilt, it is being punished for any reason based on unfairness. (www.redress.org/information-for-survivors/what-is-torture). According to wikipedia.org National Security is an idea that a government, along with its senate, should protect the state and its citizens against all kind of "national" crises through a variety of power projections, such as political power, economic power, military might and diplomacy. (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Profession) Torture in national security is justifiable because it is a way of extracting important information …show more content…

The nation can only protect itself to a certain extent but when it comes to terrorist they cannot protect themselves from such people so it is the duty of National Security to step in and to do so they use certain procedures like torture to gain information from the terrorists. If National Security did not use torture to retrieve some of the information it has, then many citizens would be in danger because of timed bombing, assassinations and planned attacks. Not using torture only makes it difficult for National Security to attain information because nobody would be afraid of the treatment they would receive from withholding important information and not only making it difficult but the process of attaining the information without using torture would take longer and for all we know there could be a ticking bomb. Torture is an advanced interrogation technique and people need to understand this. The world is developing and techniques will always change and become better just like technology does. The world cannot stay in the dark. They should let National Security do what they have to do in order to protect the nation. However, there are many reasons why torture is right and also why it is not right and not acceptable. How do we know that National Security is not just in love with having the power? We can’t let torture be an everyday …show more content…

National Security needs to know that torture only increases the number of terrorists because they want to be able to seek revenge. Torture victims usually tell National Security what they want to hear, this view is not only shared by many people but by John McCain, a victim of torture himself. Not only does National Security not hear the truth but using torture jeopardizes their safety. It removes the shame of torturing prisoners and it creates new enemies. Torture creates fake evidence as well as creating more violent conditions for soldiers in the wars for example wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The methods used for torture are so inhumane that they cannot be tolerated. For those reasons and countless others, I believe that torture is not necessary for national security. The public believes that National Security uses torture to save the lives of many innocent people, and they also believe that it is temporary pain which is not true. Being tortured becomes psychological a victim of torture will never forget what they might have gone through especially if they were innocent. So in this case torture is definitely not temporary it can be lifelong and unforgettable. So people and National Security should erase the thought of torture being temporary pain especially if they are not a

Show More
Related
1694 Words | 7 Pages

Many have said that they would want nonlethal torture to be used in such cases but “did not want torture to be officially recognized by our legal system.” Similar statements have posited that while “torture might be necessary in a given situation it could never be right.” This approach, that of keeping torture off-the-books, is in direct conflict with the necessity for accountability and transparency in a democracy. A democracy cannot work if the public is kept in the dark. The public must know what is going on in order to approve or disapprove.

Read More
699 Words | 3 Pages

Mahatma Gandhi, the preeminent leader of the Indian independence movement states “You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you will never imprison my mind.” This is important because torture is brutal on the body and mind. The article “Torture’s Terrible Toll” by John McCain is more convincing then the article “The Case for Torture” by Michael Levin because McCain provides more logical reasoning, he adds his own personal experience of being a captured prisoner during the Vietnam War, and he creates an emotional bond with people around the world. Through more logical reasoning McCain Argument is more valid than Levin.

Read More
515 Words | 3 Pages

In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”, he uses many cases of emotional appeal to persuade the reader that torture is necessary in extreme cases. There are many terms/statements that stick with the reader throughout the essay so that they will have more attachment to what is being said. Levin is particularly leaning to an audience based in the United States because he uses an allusion to reference an event that happened within the states and will better relate to the people that were impacted by it. The emotional appeals used in this essay are used for the purpose of persuading the reader to agree that in extreme instances torture is necessary and the United States should begin considering it as a tactic for future cases of extremity. One major eye catching factor of this essay is the repetitive use of words that imply certain stigmas.

Read More
971 Words | 4 Pages

In Michael Levin's The Case for Torture, Levin provides an argument in which he discusses the significance of inflicting torture to perpetrators as a way of punishment. In his argument, he dispenses a critical approach into what he believes justifies torture in certain situations. Torture is assumed to be banned in our culture and the thought of it takes society back to the brutal ages. He argues that societies that are enlightened reject torture and the authoritative figure that engage in its application risk the displeasure of the United States. In his perspective, he provides instances in which wrongdoers put the lives of innocent people at risk and discusses the aspect of death and idealism.

Read More
1050 Words | 5 Pages

While analyzing “The Torture Myth” and “The Case for Torture”, it is very clear to see the type of rhetorical appeals used to persuade the audience. Anne Applebaum, the writer of “The Torture Myth” --in context of the decision of electing a new Attorney General--would argue that torture is very seldomly effective, violates a person’s rights, and should be outlawed due to the irrational need upon which physical torture is used. On the other hand, Michael Levin strongly argues that physical torture is crucial to solving every imminent danger to civilians. Levin claims that if you don’t physically torture someone, you are being weak and want to allow innocent people to die over something that could have been simply done.

Read More
222 Words | 1 Pages

Before reading 1984, I disagreed with number four “Torture of a person who is a threat to our country’s freedom is acceptable as long the person does not die.” After reading the book, it has persuaded me to changed my mind to think otherwise. O’Brien says “There are three stages in your reintegration” (O’Brien 215). If a person is a threat to them then they can torture to get the answers because as long as what they are doing is not said they are still a threat to them. “You must understand the construction of this cage.

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

As this article mentions many people do believe that torture works as nobody could resist the physical and mental torture people are put through. In reality most successful cases have been done by psychology experts using other methods. They used human knowledge and applied it to the interrogation. Moskalenko, Sophia. " Great Minds Think Alike: Psychology Of An Effective Interrogation."

Read More
1682 Words | 7 Pages

An inmate that was one of the few lucky to be released from Guantanamo Bay said in press conference that everyone is tortured at GTMO (Associated Press). In most cases the Government says that they use torture as means to get intelligence,basically the ends justify the means. However according to DeGarmo, that there is no scientifically evidence that suggest torturing plays a significant role in gaining valuable intelligence in fact science proves that torture plays no role in what so ever in gaining intelligence. When taking a step back and looking at the picture we can see that the majority of the inmates being tortured have been in GTMO for five years or more, so any intelligence that we would obtain them would either be, one out of date or two, inaccurate given the fact that the inmates have no accesses to the outside world. Furthermore the act of using intelligence to gain intelligence is never acceptable and violates human rights and the Geneva Convention (DeGarmo).

Read More
1758 Words | 8 Pages

In the United States came under attack for depriving terrorists of human and constitutional rights. These non-citizens should be protected under international human right laws, however just as in 1942, the united states uses the grounds of protecting national security as justification for their actions. Many Americans agree that terrorist should be tortured for information, as they pose a threat to national security, however this view is not held worldwide. Torture of these captives goes against international humanitarian efforts. " In its treatment of the detainees at Guantanamo, (the United States) has been unwilling to fully apply international humanitarian law ...

Read More
1082 Words | 5 Pages

Most of the time when someone is tortured it is because the interrogators are desperate for Important or valuable information. However, why would real “terrorist” give up valuable information that would expose their cause and what they believe in when they know they are going to die one way or the other. This just goes to show that the “suspected terrorist” are in fact suspected and aren’t real terrorist and shouldn’t be

Read More
574 Words | 3 Pages

The second relevant point to make in support of the claim that it should be legal for the U.S. to torture terrorists is that terrorists may give up information unknown to us. To illustrate this point, high ranking leaders of terrorist groups have knowledge of terror plans and other useful information. Additionally, a high ranking leader is likely to give up this information if subjected to enough pain. In short, torture could lead not only to information sought by interrogators, but also additional

Read More
501 Words | 3 Pages

This is similar to our CIA society today, For torture to happened it can not happen on U.S soil. It must happen some place else.

Read More
150 Words | 1 Pages

Torture is definitely a public health issue because it creates health concerns in individuals in many different ways, such as mental health and physical health. It is also a public health concern because we have seen large number of tortured victims that are traumatically affected by their past. This trauma leads to a life of mental health, a life of discomfort and distrust in the world. Torture takes many forms that ends up with the same outcome in tortured survival and that is physical and mental instabilities that greatly affects their health and life. With the desire to ensure the protection of the public, torture is an issue that has to be addressed and prevented to ensure that people are living a life of comfort in the trust they have

Read More
1226 Words | 5 Pages

There has always been torture since the beginning of human civilization. Torture can be conducted for various reasons or for no reason at all. It can be conducted to extract information or to punish someone for what they have been accused of. It can also be done just for the enjoyment of doing it. For all of these reasons, there also are different methods that can be done.

Read More
1041 Words | 5 Pages

It takes the torturers to the low level of terrorists, weakens international law, and the anti-American sentiment could be amplified if conversation about the torture got out (Messerli). Other problems with the torture is that prisoners may give false information just to avoid torture and punishment or that an innocent person may be accused and tortured falsely. Terrorists may also choose death or suicide before giving in to becoming a prisoner of war. Therefore, the valuable information that they could have shared may never be

Read More

More about The Role Of Torture In National Security

Related Topics

Open Document