Torture and Morality

[dodo1331]

Not torturing terrorists.. Do you think that will work? These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country, and not to give a piece of information on anything. How else will we get information from them? Becoming friends with them? Not likely.

No one WANTS to torture. Its required for the current fight we are in.

WRONG! Most of these 'terrorists' are random joes who decided to pick up a pitchfork to defend land, family, religion against the foreign invaders. The common taliban for example might have some training or none at all I bet, but I doubt it's on the same level as a US GI, hence, torturing these poor souls (which I condone) would bare it's fruits. But it all depends on how much he truly knows.

"These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country"

Yeah, I hear that a lot about Americans. Just watched Palin's little chat with her alaskans puppies, disgusting. Never heard such a load of BS like "blah blah troops defending right of free fucking speech --- let me exercise it now".

Typical. I expected this. Someone deciding to make sure people trying to kill us all get proper rights.. Let me explain this to you.

We are in a war. People are trying to blow our soldiers and our country to pieces. Our soldiers are the best trained in the freaking WORLD (I think? I could be wrong on this; someone get me on it if I am.) You expect terrorists to be better a standard US soldier? No. We /must/ torture to save AMERICAN lives, not to make sure some guy who would've killed himself to kill a couple of Americans gets his proper rights.

And ah, yes. Of course. More America bashing and Palin bashing. Again, expected. Bash Republicans, Libertarians, and Christians too while you're at it. Everyone who has a different opinion then you, right?

EDIT: Oh, and do you think the terrorists will think twice about torturing a couple of soldiers they capture? No. They've done it before, and it will happen again.

 

[RebelRising]

Thank you, Therumancer, for a balanced and rational take on torture. We all know it isn't pretty, but the circumstances by which it's often brought about aren't pretty either; that in itself is a case-by-case concept, what with torture often used to suppress in dictatorships. But on the other hand, it's benefits are not absent. I would certainly crack under torture (at least, I would if they went for the family jewels), but this idea that people can lie to save themselves is actually kind of flimsy. If under continuing physical and mental pain, your mind most likely wouldn't function well enough to fabricate a lie, nor would highly trained professionals fall for it.

That said, I would certainly go for a more efficient and surefire way of extracting information, because torture, as the Bush Administration has proved, it isn't fail-proof. I would like to hear more success stories concerning torture, but that would never get through the media.

 

[Ultrajoe]

In my mind, any situation where torture is the only method to stop an imminent and horrific threat has come about due to gross incompetence. People who allow the security of multiple people to hinge on the brutaly extracted, last minute confession of a known hostile should not have their jobs, let alone be allowed to torture a man. Torture is so random, so unreliable and often incredibly innacurate so as to make it nothing less than an addmitance of defeat.

Any situation where torture is 'necessary' has only arisen because the people in charge have proven themselves incapable of gathering and managing intelligence. As you have stated, torture could only just be excused if there was sufficient intelligence to make it effective. Nobody who needs to torture has the capacity, nobody without the need to torture has the authority.

And that's before we even get to the ethical side of things.

 

[cainx10a]

Not torturing terrorists.. Do you think that will work? These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country, and not to give a piece of information on anything. How else will we get information from them? Becoming friends with them? Not likely.

No one WANTS to torture. Its required for the current fight we are in.

WRONG! Most of these 'terrorists' are random joes who decided to pick up a pitchfork to defend land, family, religion against the foreign invaders. The common taliban for example might have some training or none at all I bet, but I doubt it's on the same level as a US GI, hence, torturing these poor souls (which I condone) would bare it's fruits. But it all depends on how much he truly knows.

"These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country"

Yeah, I hear that a lot about Americans. Just watched Palin's little chat with her alaskans puppies, disgusting. Never heard such a load of BS like "blah blah troops defending right of free fucking speech --- let me exercise it now".

Typical. I expected this. Someone deciding to make sure people trying to kill us all get proper rights.. Let me explain this to you.

We are in a war. People are trying to blow our soldiers and our country to pieces. Our soldiers are the best trained in the freaking WORLD (I think? I could be wrong on this; someone get me on it if I am.) You expect terrorists to be better a standard US soldier? No. We /must/ torture to save AMERICAN lives, not to make sure some guy who would've killed himself to kill a couple of Americans gets his proper rights.

And ah, yes. Of course. More America bashing and Palin bashing. Again, expected.

1. Learn to READ: ok, let me explain what I said - Taliban 'troops' don't have the training to withstand torture like a trained American soldier would, so torture works. Torturing a high ranked soldier would bare it's fruits, that is, would give the right information that might stop the next plane to crash into Sarah Palin's backyard. Torturing every captured taliban won't work as some others have explained above.

2. And saying that they are 'indoctrinated' since birth to fight for their country is no different than talking about American Patriotism.

3. There was no America bashing, but Palin is an exception as I have yet to hear someone as dumb as her.

 

[Therumancer]

Torture is inhumane and still unlikely to get the results you're truly after. Hell, you don't have to break a single one of my fingers for me to tell you I saw who really shot JFK. And I'm sure the more joints you snap, the more detail I'll recall about her. You'll feel a little silly knocking down Paris Hilton's door afterwards though.

You apparently didn't read my post in detail.

To put things into context of your example we only picked you up because we know your connected. We've got photos of you training with Castro's army and receiving orders to support an attempt on JFK's life. Otherwise you wouldn't be here since we aren't going to waste our time picking up people off the street.

That guy behind Irving the Terrible, he's Cancer Man's eviller more well informed brother here to oversee the interrogation and put the pieces together. You describe Paris Hilton, well sorry Cancer Man's brother already knows she works for the FBI and provides safehouses for agents and suerveillance on guests staying at Daddy's hotel chain. She's one of ours. So of course this means we know your full of it, and break more fingers.

... and of course the interrogation is going to be conducted along the lines of what we already know you did.


However for the sake of arguement, that's mostly just how it would be done. Chances are they would never torture someone for what you describe (or at least I wouldn't support it) because your dealing with something that already happened. You wouldn't be tortured nessicarly for who killed JFK (unless it was suspected more politicians were on the hit list, or that the person was still at large and capable of being apprehended).

A more realistic scenario would be along the lines of there being a planned attempt to assinate Obama. The CIA eavesdrops on communications and catches you leaving an Al Queda training facility, picking up cash and a false passport, and entering the US with orders to assist with the operation. The torture might be conducted to then find out whom your contacts are and ultimatly end the plot before anyone even knows it exists by rounding up the members of your cell. In this case they already KNOW who you are because they spotted you leaving the terrorist training camp and intercepted part of your orders. They aren't just going to be able to stick you in some nice little cell and gradually work on the information because the other guys might very well continue the plan and whack Obama without you. Bottom line is, we want the rest of them out of comission.

So in that case you've got Irving The Terrible doing the torture (actually a Jewish Dentist working for the CIA) and Cancer Man's more evil brother sitting there with all kinds of CIA information that can put whatever you say into context with what they know already from operations going on all over the place. You make something up, concoct fictional names, etc... this guy knows, because he knows who the players are and where pieces are that a pawn like you doesn't even know are on the board.

That's how it's done.

 

[Dys]

It is often innective, and gives far too much power to authorities to be moral.

I'm sure we've all heard of dedicated police planting or inventing evidence on known criminals to get of a street. Sometimes bad people are arrested for things they haven't done, and I don't think I need to point out how immoral that is. Do you honestly beleive that, given free reign to hunt terrorists (or whatever) that the counter terrorist officers wouldn't take every step they feel possible to eliminate the threat? Is that not their job?

On top of giving power than can be easily abused, it is usually unnecissary. These terrorists/criminals/people seen to deserve torture are very rarely trained SEAL operatives who can resist torture, no doubt they can be tricked into giving up information same as any common criminal. There are no shortage of other methods to get the information that don't involve shattering the persons sanity.

the other guys might very well continue the plan and whack Obama without you. Bottom line is, we want the rest of them out of comission.

Ignoring the absurdity of arresting and torturing people for being in a shady place talking to shady characters, I'll just point out the the threat of torture is more than enough to stop any serious plot. These 'other guys' would have to be beyond ammatures to try and continue after one of their team has suddenly gone missing, especially when they have been given information that could compromise their cause. Even without the threat of torture, the threat of one of your own deserting and selling the information to the US is far to great of a risk to keep such a mission live.

 

[dodo1331]

Not torturing terrorists.. Do you think that will work? These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country, and not to give a piece of information on anything. How else will we get information from them? Becoming friends with them? Not likely.

No one WANTS to torture. Its required for the current fight we are in.

WRONG! Most of these 'terrorists' are random joes who decided to pick up a pitchfork to defend land, family, religion against the foreign invaders. The common taliban for example might have some training or none at all I bet, but I doubt it's on the same level as a US GI, hence, torturing these poor souls (which I condone) would bare it's fruits. But it all depends on how much he truly knows.

"These guys are indoctrinated from birth at times to give their life for their country"

Yeah, I hear that a lot about Americans. Just watched Palin's little chat with her alaskans puppies, disgusting. Never heard such a load of BS like "blah blah troops defending right of free fucking speech --- let me exercise it now".

Typical. I expected this. Someone deciding to make sure people trying to kill us all get proper rights.. Let me explain this to you.

We are in a war. People are trying to blow our soldiers and our country to pieces. Our soldiers are the best trained in the freaking WORLD (I think? I could be wrong on this; someone get me on it if I am.) You expect terrorists to be better a standard US soldier? No. We /must/ torture to save AMERICAN lives, not to make sure some guy who would've killed himself to kill a couple of Americans gets his proper rights.

And ah, yes. Of course. More America bashing and Palin bashing. Again, expected.

1. Learn to READ: ok, let me explain what I said - Taliban 'troops' don't have the training to withstand torture like a trained American soldier would, so torture works. Torturing a high ranked soldier would bare it's fruits, that is, would give the right information that might stop the next plane to crash into Sarah Palin's backyard. Torturing every captured taliban won't work as some others have explained above.

2. And saying that they are 'indoctrinated' since birth to fight for their country is no different than talking about American Patriotism.

3. There was no America bashing, but Palin is an exception as I have yet to hear someone as dumb as her.

1. My bad, I'm tired at the moment so let me clear up some clarifications in my post. Yea, I know that torturing random troops won't work. Highranking soldiers are the only ones to bother torturing, but some people seem to think not to use that either.

2. American Patriotism isn't a main part of, well, anything. Its pretty restricted to the South these days, as pretty much everyone can tell, and even that is wavering a bit. If your resolve to radical Islam starts to waver once you're already in a terrorist organization.. Well, chances are you're probably already dead.

3. There has been way too much hate on Palin for mistakes she's made, and while I don't like her or any other of her fellow politicians, she doesn't deserve most of what she gets.

 

[Ultrajoe]

this guy knows, because he knows who the players are and where pieces are that a pawn like you doesn't even know are on the board.

That's how it's done.

Forgive my ignorance, I don't pretend to possess any great level of intelligence; but if you already know exactly what the right answers are, why do you need to torture somebody?

 

[Therumancer]

In my mind, any situation where torture is the only method to stop an imminent and horrific threat has come about due to gross incompetence. People who allow the security of multiple people to hinge on the brutaly extracted, last minute confession of a known hostile should not have their jobs, let alone be allowed to torture a man. Torture is so random, so unreliable and often incredibly innacurate so as to make it nothing less than an addmitance of defeat.

Any situation where torture is 'necessary' has only arisen because the people in charge have proven themselves incapable of gathering and managing intelligence. As you have stated, torture could only just be excused if there was sufficient intelligence to make it effective. Nobody who needs to torture has the capacity, nobody without the need to torture has the authority.

And that's before we even get to the ethical side of things.

Which is of course misinformed. Simply put people wouldn't waste their time with it if it didn't work. There wouldn't be an issue because nobody would want to torture someone else due to it being unreliable. There just aren't enough sociopaths out there to make for a trend.

Simply put, unlike in spy fiction people don't keep long and complex documents about their espionage and terrorist activities. What's more operations are planned and carried out relatively quickly.

The kind of issue we're talking about is (getting away from the domestic issue where I mentioned "Cancer Man's eviller brother" as sort of a joke) like when you know there is a terrorist cell ambushing patrols and seeing up bombs in an area. During an ambush one of your guys captures an enemy fighter. In general these cells are mobile and are going to move on to strike again, so of course you want to know where these dudes are so you can take them out. You also want to know what other traps they set.

So basically back at the camp you strap the guy to a field surgery cart, call in the local military intelligence guy who knows the local situation and what the spooks/recon have picked up, and go to work. If you succeed you save a lot of lives and perhaps wipe out the cell, if you fail (which is less likely than you think) at the worst you hurt some schmuck who was trying to kill you but he's going to live.

It has nothing to do with incompetance or anything else. It's simply a matter of reality.

Now on the other hand, if you have soldiers cutting fingers off enemy prisoners, blinding them with battery acid, or whatever else "just for fun, because we hate the enemy" that's an atrocity. That's not what we're talking about.

... and really, when you get down to it it's not like anyone (except the rare sociopath) wakes up and goes "Gosh, I hope I can find some enemy soldier to torture on a field surgery cot today". If you think so, you probably read too many horror novels.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Simply put people wouldn't waste their time with it if it didn't work.

I think this is the crux of our disagreement, and with all due respect I don't want to argue over the issue when we both have valid interpretations of the facts, it doesn't get us anywhere.

 

[LaBambaMan]

Torture is inefficient because the tortured might say anything to get it to stop, and if bad enough, he or (God forbid) she might believe it themselves, thus removing your chance to get the truth.

See the Spanish Inquisition....wait for it....waaaaiiit for it...

 

[Mozared]

When we're talking about torture and incarceration I always take a bit of an anarchist stand. If you drop all the fancy stuff we humans call culture, you can't go around the fact that there's simply a group of humans inflicting harm upon another human without him having a say in it. Even for the worst of criminals, this just seems to be so wrong to me. You take away the one thing that's essential for a completely happy life, our personal freedom.

That said, I'm an incredibly just person myself, so this crashes completely with my vision that at all times karma must be applied or induced. My solution to this 'problem' has always been inducing karma as our system of 'justice'; basically, a criminal gets punished for his crime by having exactly the same crime inflicted on him. You steal something? You get stolen from. You harass somebody in the middle of the night? Someone will come for you the next day. You kill somebody? You are killed. It's in no way perfect and has some issues (how'd you handle rapists?), but it's the closest to 'morality' I've been able to come up with.

That said, the whole obvious yadda yadda point of "I don't believe torture is per definition bad" is as true as it is for basically anything you'll meet in your life - it always depends on the situation and nothing is per definition good or bad.

 

[Jedoro]

Torture is inefficient because the tortured might say anything to get it to stop, and if bad enough, he or (God forbid) she might believe it themselves, thus removing your chance to get the truth.

See the Spanish Inquisition....wait for it....waaaaiiit for it...

Aw, come on, man, I said inefficient, not a complete failure. Body of Lies has a good view on it. I think that's what it's called, the one with Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio.

 

[thiosk]

Torturing is always justified, legal, and more or less necessary in every case.

As long as its me doing the torturing.

 

[LaBambaMan]

Torture is inefficient because the tortured might say anything to get it to stop, and if bad enough, he or (God forbid) she might believe it themselves, thus removing your chance to get the truth.

See the Spanish Inquisition....wait for it....waaaaiiit for it...

Aw, come on, man, I said inefficient, not a complete failure. Body of Lies has a good view on it. I think that's what it's called, the one with Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio.

You have the correct movie title, but I believe we're having two vastly different conversations. I was trying to make a not-so-witty-or-clever Monty Python joke happen.

 

[HentMas]

torture is bad

no matter how many intelligence you´ve got, something always might end up with you getting the wrong person, it is bad, it will always be bad

but i understand it is an usefull tool in war times.

 

[Jedoro]

Torture is inefficient because the tortured might say anything to get it to stop, and if bad enough, he or (God forbid) she might believe it themselves, thus removing your chance to get the truth.

See the Spanish Inquisition....wait for it....waaaaiiit for it...

Aw, come on, man, I said inefficient, not a complete failure. Body of Lies has a good view on it. I think that's what it's called, the one with Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio.

You have the correct movie title, but I believe we're having two vastly different conversations. I was trying to make a not-so-witty-or-clever Monty Python joke happen.

Dammit! Someone missed a joke I made earlier, and I chuckled on the inside, and then I go and do the same thing.

Spoiler: I'm sad now

 

[Akai Shizuku]

Sun Tzu, said that you should be kind to prisoners. However, if there is INDESPUTABLE evidence that a prisoner is hiding something that could be usfull to your cause, I'm all for it.

I agree with Sun Tzu on the matter.

I don't like torture, I really don't like it. I was playing this game (http://forums.blitwise.com/forums/showthread.php?t=841), and I was given a mission to torture a building owner in order to retrieve the possessions they stole from someone else. I just couldn't do it. I mean, I taped their mouth up, turned on the car battery, but I just can't do that.

 

[LaBambaMan]

Torture is inefficient because the tortured might say anything to get it to stop, and if bad enough, he or (God forbid) she might believe it themselves, thus removing your chance to get the truth.

See the Spanish Inquisition....wait for it....waaaaiiit for it...

Aw, come on, man, I said inefficient, not a complete failure. Body of Lies has a good view on it. I think that's what it's called, the one with Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio.

You have the correct movie title, but I believe we're having two vastly different conversations. I was trying to make a not-so-witty-or-clever Monty Python joke happen.

Dammit! Someone missed a joke I made earlier, and I chuckled on the inside, and then I go and do the same thing.

Spoiler: I'm sad now

Maybe we're just not that good at this game.