OK. So torture is the new buzzword, especially amongst every internet wannabe with a voice like yours truly. Does this mean that I have to jump on the bandwagon and throw my two cents in? You know me so well. There are a couple points we have to consider when talking about torture. The first is to define what torture is. Second is to discuss whether it has a place in our society in the year 2009.
One definition of torture is that it is "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty." What would fall under this category? Certainly pulling fingernails would qualify. Running electrical current through a prisoner's genitals probably would also qualify (except for a few weirdos out there; you know who you are). Waterboarding? Probably not. It is psychologically taxing on the individual being waterboarded but does not seem to actually cause excruciating pain.
Another definition is "extreme anguish of body or mind; agony." More acts would fall under this category. Certainly extreme sleep deprivation would anguish the body and mind. Would it cause agony? Maybe, maybe not. I think the better tact would be to stick with something that almost everyone would agree on. Focus on the common sense question of whether you would be afraid of an impending form of "torture". Would most everyone be terrified if they were told that they would have their fingernails pulled off one by one? Certainly. Would the same reaction be caused by the threat of sleep deprivation or waterboarding? Probably not. Therefore, in my humble opinion, various painful physical tortures would qualify as genuine torture while sleep deprivation and waterboarding would not.
Now that we've determined what is torture, do we have a place for it in our modern society? That depends on a few factors. Does torture work? Certainly it does sometimes. We have harshly interrogated prisoners and obtained important information that has led to the potential saving of many American lives. A recent and notable example is that the "mastermind" of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, gave crucial information that led to the thwarting of a plot against the city of Los Angeles. One of the techniques used was waterboarding. I shudder to think about how many people could have died had interrogators refused to use this method of getting information.
As Adam Carolla has recently said, torture must work to some degree because if it didn't, it would no longer be around. It has been used for thousands of years because it does work. Name something else that has been around for so long and doesn't work. It is true that sometimes it doesn't work, and unfortunately in such a situation it can inflict useless pain on the subject. Is this worth it in the name of protecting Americans? As they say in Washington, yes and no.
We are in a unique position in the world. We are capable of inflicting far more pain than we would absorb. This is an argument in favor of torture. We will be able to torture more than we will be tortured and the information we gain much of the time will be valuable. On the other hand, our powerful position puts us in a position of having to set a good example for the world. The negative feelings toward the U.S. will only increase if we are acting as the bad guy. We need to be very selective in what we do and how often we do it. A little isolationism can be healthy but the world is small and we do need to at least have other countries willing to work with us a little from time to time.
So here is how I see it. Sleep deprivation and waterboarding cause no long-term physical damage and can garner helpful information for interrogators. War is hell. Sometimes you need to pull out all the stops in order to get crucial information that could save lives and shorten conflicts. Last I checked my last name isn't Machiavelli, but sometimes the ends really do justify the means. I don't think a person being honest with himself would argue that it would be better to have let countless people die in Los Angeles rather than waterboard a scumbag on principle. We do need to be harsh sometimes to get what we need. Peeling off fingernails is a big no-no but waterboarding and sleep deprivation are winners. That's where I would draw the line. Sometimes you just need to be the bad guy. Call me shallow, but I care about the lives of innocent Americans just a little more than scumbag terrorists. I'll take my chances in the court of world opinion.
One definition of torture is that it is "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty." What would fall under this category? Certainly pulling fingernails would qualify. Running electrical current through a prisoner's genitals probably would also qualify (except for a few weirdos out there; you know who you are). Waterboarding? Probably not. It is psychologically taxing on the individual being waterboarded but does not seem to actually cause excruciating pain.
Another definition is "extreme anguish of body or mind; agony." More acts would fall under this category. Certainly extreme sleep deprivation would anguish the body and mind. Would it cause agony? Maybe, maybe not. I think the better tact would be to stick with something that almost everyone would agree on. Focus on the common sense question of whether you would be afraid of an impending form of "torture". Would most everyone be terrified if they were told that they would have their fingernails pulled off one by one? Certainly. Would the same reaction be caused by the threat of sleep deprivation or waterboarding? Probably not. Therefore, in my humble opinion, various painful physical tortures would qualify as genuine torture while sleep deprivation and waterboarding would not.
Now that we've determined what is torture, do we have a place for it in our modern society? That depends on a few factors. Does torture work? Certainly it does sometimes. We have harshly interrogated prisoners and obtained important information that has led to the potential saving of many American lives. A recent and notable example is that the "mastermind" of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, gave crucial information that led to the thwarting of a plot against the city of Los Angeles. One of the techniques used was waterboarding. I shudder to think about how many people could have died had interrogators refused to use this method of getting information.
As Adam Carolla has recently said, torture must work to some degree because if it didn't, it would no longer be around. It has been used for thousands of years because it does work. Name something else that has been around for so long and doesn't work. It is true that sometimes it doesn't work, and unfortunately in such a situation it can inflict useless pain on the subject. Is this worth it in the name of protecting Americans? As they say in Washington, yes and no.
We are in a unique position in the world. We are capable of inflicting far more pain than we would absorb. This is an argument in favor of torture. We will be able to torture more than we will be tortured and the information we gain much of the time will be valuable. On the other hand, our powerful position puts us in a position of having to set a good example for the world. The negative feelings toward the U.S. will only increase if we are acting as the bad guy. We need to be very selective in what we do and how often we do it. A little isolationism can be healthy but the world is small and we do need to at least have other countries willing to work with us a little from time to time.
So here is how I see it. Sleep deprivation and waterboarding cause no long-term physical damage and can garner helpful information for interrogators. War is hell. Sometimes you need to pull out all the stops in order to get crucial information that could save lives and shorten conflicts. Last I checked my last name isn't Machiavelli, but sometimes the ends really do justify the means. I don't think a person being honest with himself would argue that it would be better to have let countless people die in Los Angeles rather than waterboard a scumbag on principle. We do need to be harsh sometimes to get what we need. Peeling off fingernails is a big no-no but waterboarding and sleep deprivation are winners. That's where I would draw the line. Sometimes you just need to be the bad guy. Call me shallow, but I care about the lives of innocent Americans just a little more than scumbag terrorists. I'll take my chances in the court of world opinion.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment