Prisoners of War Issue In war, every act that is committed may be questionable. Was it necessary to kill that person? Do we need to drop this bomb? Should we have tortured that prisoner? Although the military personnel may question or be questioned about their decisions, they are likely saving lives while doing these tasks. This may not seem like the most appropriate option, but in times of hardship and war, it looks as if it is the only way to save the people whom the men are fighting for. In turn, taking the enemy captive for questioning may also be necessary—to find a bomb they may have placed or to find the mastermind behind their operation.
A prisoner of war is defined as “any person captured or interned by a belligerent power during war.” The term used loosely can also apply to civilians or others associated with the military, not necessarily just the members of the armed forces. The term “prisoners of war” dates back to 1660, proving that prisoners of war are not a new thing that is coming about. For instance, in World War II (1939-1945), the Japanese captured over 140,000 prisoners and treated them very cruelly (Gibson). The Japanese paid no respect to the Geneva Conventions and treated prisoners however they needed to get the information they wanted. The Geneva Conventions of
…show more content…
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