ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Torture For National Security

940 Words4 Pages

As the rate of terrorism seems to increase, so does the need for national security. As most people try to kill hundreds for numerous reasons, what can we do to stop them. There are some ways, simple ways that our easy to pursue. This is called torture for the national security. This will help protect any nation's, and will scare the enemies into surrender. The act of torture has some pros and cons, but will be better for every nation in the end. The first reason is because the information we can obtain in this way will be amazingly, extremely helpful. In the article “Is Torture Ever Justified,” they speak of the fact “There is little difference between a man on the verge of shooting innocent civilians and a man that retains and withholds …show more content…

Some may argue that it should be wrong to use torture for national security because it is anti-religious and may be used in a racist or sexist manor. Though I disagree because religion woulden be acted upon if we can't protect our nation, and if you our going to harm or kill slathers of people for any reason, then the state or nation should have the right to figure out why, no matter what it takes. Also, using torture for national security is a lovely idea because it benefits every nation involved. It sounds crazy, but the nation using the torture is safe from outside harm, and the country that is being tortured will come to fear the other nation and eventually the nation's will respect each other, are less likely to wage wars, may allow trade, and may eventually make an alliance, which will benefit both nation's …show more content…

”. If a man or woman had a gun held to your head, would you want somebody to help you or save you, or would you want someone to leave you be, to possibly die. If you do, my apologies. If not, well… the act of torture for a nation's security is simply the protection of a person's or a multitudinous group of people's lives. Imagine this, you wake up in the morning and do your morning routine, and in your car ride for work or school, you see someone being threatened. You stop the car and get out. The man threatening the person is part of the nation's police. You realize it is torture. Change the scene. Once you get to work, it's a normal day until there is a terrorist threatening to blow up the building. A large amount of people may get hurt or killed. The destruction of the building will affect the entire economy. None of this would've happened if torture for national security was being used. Torture for a nation's security can and will protect lives and the economy. In disagreement, there is the fact that it will be against religion and may even cause war. If we start to hurt the country's people, then they may want to start a war. Also, it may cost the government multitudinous people because it's anti-religious and cruel. Even after that, riots and revolts may begin because it doesn't set well with the most common group of people, citizens. This may easily be countered through

Show More
Related
185 Words | 1 Pages

In the article “The Case for Torture”, Michael Levin argues that the use of torture as a way to save lives is justifiable and necessary. Levin draws a series of cases where torture might be acceptable so as to set certain precedent for the justification of torture in more realistic cases. HoweverLevin illustrates three cases where torture might be justifiable.he describes a terrorist keeping city of millions hostage to an atomic bomb, the second, a terrorist who has implanted remote bombs on a plane and the third, a terrorist who has kidnapped a baby. torture and its consequences have been recorded in countries around of world over a vast span of time, and for a variety of reasons. Levin makes no such attempt to expand his article beyond

Read More
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
686 Words | 3 Pages

The Case for Torture Wins Torture is it morally acceptable? Many have debated this argument but I would like to bring up two main conflicting view points from Michael Levin, and Marzieh Ghisai. Michael Levin is a Jewish law professor who wrote The Case for Torture where he advocates where torture is acceptable in some circumstances.

Read More
295 Words | 2 Pages

After finding some torture tactics, it helped me research about the negative effects of torture. In his article, “Torture is a Crime”, Curt Goering listed the negative effects of torture. He argues that torture is illegal, ineffective, immoral and makes those around us unsafe. Curt uses ethos in his piece to back up his main argument. For example, he mentions that in 1984, the UN adopted the Convention against torture and it was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1990.

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
208 Words | 1 Pages

Anne Applebaum states “The really interesting question is not whether torture works but why so many people in our society want to believe it works.” Applebaum is against the use of torture as she questions its effectiveness. America has operated under the false pretense that torture is a viable option for obtaining information. She argues that torture damages the country’s image and does little to acquire useful intelligence. Torture is merely a way for officers to take their anger and frustration out on detainees.

Read More
1088 Words | 5 Pages

In medieval times, torture was used to punish criminals, deter crime, and gather information. There were many different types of tortures, most of which were brutal and painful. At the time, torture was deemed necessary to maintain order. Laws were harsh and torture was severe, but effective form of punishment. Despite its effectiveness, torture was often an unfair and extremely cruel punishment, and should have been eliminated in all forms.

Read More
776 Words | 4 Pages

Sometimes Enhanced Interrogation does not even work because detainee can give misleading information so that they will stop the pain. Sometimes our government detain an innocent person and then

Read More
1032 Words | 5 Pages

2016). Similar to the arguments applied for the rights ethical framework, every human deserves equal treatment, whether it is the victim or the torturer. It is easy to minimize the direct effect that torturing someone has on the interrogator. In various cases, the torturer becomes the tortured as well (Boothe 2006, 25-26). The interrogator is mentally changed forever; the mental burden and imagery will be a constant reminder of his actions and will be detrimental to his life.

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
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
890 Words | 4 Pages

The kidnapper was prosecuted and sentenced to life imprisonment; however the officer ‘was also prosecuted and convicted of violating the kidnappers rights’ (Sandel, 2011). This presents an interesting moral dilemma, can torture ever be justified? And was the officer acting in a morally respectable way? In this essay I will answer these questions by analysing the arguments which justify or condemn his actions, from both the utilitarian and deontological perspectives.

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Torture For National Security

Related Topics

Open Document