What Was Sullivan's Argument To The Abolition Of Torture?

In this paper I will discuss the issue of torture. More precisely, i will be looking at “The abolition of torture” by Sullivan and “The truth about torture: it’s time to be honest about doing a terrible thing” by Krauthammer. I will be arguing that Sullivan presents a better case than Krauthammer on the issue of whether a liberal democratic community ought to ever resort to torture, because i feel that Sullivan presents strong points and Krauthammer presents weak ones. I will begin by outlining the key points in Krauthammer’s argument, and then outline the points in Sullivan’s argument. I will then continue to outline why Sullivan’s argument are strong to the objection of torture in a liberal democratic community while also consider objections to my

He begins by describing the three types of war prisoners. The first is the ordinary soldier who was caught on the battlefield; therefore he is entitled to humane treatment because he has done nothing wrong. Second was the terrorist is by profession he is entitled to no humane treatment, however we it to he because it is morally right. Third we have the terrorist with information, now the issue of torture gets more problematic and the easy virtues of humane treatment don 't easily apply. To explain the terrorist with information better, Krauthammer goes on to describe the “ticking time-bomb” scenario as the following: “A terrorist has planted a nuclear bomb in New York City. It will go off in one hour. A million people will die. You capture the terrorist. He knows where it is. He 's not talking . . . If you have the slightest belief that hanging this man by his thumbs will get you the information to save a million people, are you permitted to do it? Now, on most issues regarding torture, I confess tentativeness and uncertainty. But on this issue, there can be no uncertainty: Not only is it permissible to hang this miscreant by his thumbs. It is a moral