When I first opened up YouDecide's article on whether or not torture is a legitimate means of combating terrorism, I thought I knew my stance. However, after reading through the site's arguments, my stance changed. Then it changed again. I just kept going back and forth on my position, simply because of their strong persuasion of the subject.
I was initially against using torture to fight and prevent terrorism. The opening of this article convinced me further that I had the right position on the subject:
To many, the torture debate begins and ends with the Geneva Conventions: As a signatory to the treaties, it is illegal for agents of the United States to torture. Period. What's more, many view the notion of U.S. operatives resorting to torture as downright un-American. It diminishes our standing in the world, they argue, and doing so potentially exposes our troops, when captured, to retaliatory torture. As if that weren't bad enough, the argument goes, torturing our enemies isn't even worth the potential backlash: Information gleaned by torture is notoriously unreliable. (YouDecide)
My opinion changed however as I read further, and kept saying no to the article's consistent question: "Is torture a legitimate means of combating terrorism?" I read that Al Qaeda and other terrorist cells are not national states and therefore never ratified the Conventions mentioned above. I was also told that these terrorists "hide among civilians and deliberately target noncombatants—a clear violation of the fundamental principle that war is waged against armed participants" (
YouDecide).
The website YouDecide is produced by KQED, and its whole purpose is to persuade its readers of the opposite of their stance. The further I read into this process, the more I was persuaded. The reasoning gets stronger. I went back to my original stance towards the end because of the latter.
Abstract notions of governmental legitimacy aside, there’s a more fundamental objection many have to torture: It’s un-American. This is the country, after all, that helped liberate Europe from the Nazis; the country that reacts in horror to the notion of political prisoners—and what they likely endure—in China and to accounts of Saddam Hussein’s chemical attacks on Kurdish civilians. It is the country that ensures the freedom of speech and assembly. It is also the country where—and this is critical to the torture debate—one is presumed innocent until proven guilty (YouDecide).
When I finished the article, I had been given many aspects of how torture could be useful in fighting terrorism. I was also informed of how torture could prove to be a negative: degrading the United States' image, getting false information, etc. Terrorism is defined, according to
Dictionary.com, as "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes; the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization; a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government." If only government and political issues could be fought in a senate or other such building; ending the lives of countless innocents is not solving anything. The reign of terrorism has not ceased, and I do not believe torture will help the matter because:
Throughout human history, there have been many threats to the security of nations. These threats have brought about large-scale losses of life, the destruction of property, widespread illness and injury, the displacement of large numbers of people, and devastating economic loss (FEMA: Terrorism).
These acts of terrorism will never end until some sort of agreement is decided upon. If government officials would sit down in a safe environment with the people who come up with the plots of terrorism (highly unlikely), then reasons of terrorism could be understood and solutions made. Video chat could be useful; devices could be used to protect identities - anything for peace. Torture is not solving the overall problem, only immediate threats. One has to look at the big picture.
Comments
Lindsey, I agree that
Lindsey,
I agree that torture is not the solution to ending the immense and devastating problem of terrorism. However, I can understand extreme cases where its use might be deemed necessary.
Take 9/11 for instance. I'm sure many people would understand using torture as a means of obtaining information if it meant that the Twin Towers would still be standing today and thousands of lives were saved.
I'm not saying that I believe torture is morally acceptable. It is an awful form of extracting information and can lead to obtaining false information, since people will do and say anything to stop pain.
I just think that if a country's government knew a major terrorist attack was going to occur on their soil and they had a terrorist from that group in their custody, I could understand their desire to do what they felt necessary to save their citizens' lives.
What is your stance on using it in extreme cases?
Lindsey, Great article! I
Lindsey,
Great article! I really enjoyed reading more into the topic about torture as an answer to terrorism. I also agree with you that we do need to look at the "big picture." I do not think that torture is a good solution. Personally, it will just cause more problems. The articles you quoted hold many valid points. Torturing terrorists would be un-American because like your quote stated "one is presumed innocent until proven guilty." Looking at it on a more elementary level torturing terrorists that attack the US can be compared to playing down to the level of your competition. In sports, good teams are often seen to have just average games against the worst teams in the league when in reality they shouldn't be winning 1-0 but more like 5-0. Terrorists attack the United States because they are unsure how to show their hate for us. The US is one of the leading nations in the world and I think it's about time we started acting that way. Let's act more mature and show terrorists that there are other ways to combat problems without violent means. I think torturing them also stands as a way to egg them on. It tells them that they got a response out of us and that they are bothering us. Violence is not the answer we should be sending.
However, I can also see how maybe if we torture terrorists they'll want to back off for fear of being tortured. But, I still stand with torture is wrong. Right now in English we are reading the book "Dead Man Walking." There is a similar case presented in the book. Executing criminals is not stopping people from committing crimes and being sent to death row. There the US thought that if they show criminals that their actions have even more serious consequences then they'll stop committing crimes for the sake of their own lives. The US was wrong in thinking this. If anything the crime rate has risen since the death penalty. What do you think?
I strongly encourage you to write more on this topic and look forward to your future posts!
Lindsey, I really like
Lindsey,
I really like your post. You brought both sides into it, which was the assignment, but whats important is you payed attention, and let the youdecide website change your opinion. With every extreme opinion, like those you hear on torture, there is another side to it. Like you said "torture is not solving the overall problem, only immediate threats" there is a good and bad side to subject, and we need to find the grey area of these extremes in order to find peace.
Dear Lindsey, I enjoyed
Dear Lindsey,
I enjoyed reading your post because of the level of uncertainty you express when forming your opinion. It seems that too often people form opinions and then never fully question why they hold those beliefs. Political issues are issues because a large number of people believe in multiple sides of the debate. I believe that understanding other positions of debates and even questioning your own is a valuable process in today's diverse landscape. I look forward reading about to any future issues you may decide to address.
-Michael
Lindsey, On a funny note,
Lindsey,
On a funny note, your article reminds me of SALT, the Angelina Jolie movie about Russian terrorists hiding among us. However, it also seems to align with Sister Helen Prejean's argument against Capital Punishment. It's a dead-end solution. Torture, and Capital Punishment may alleviate the public's immediate fear of murderers on the loose, but the government can't solve a murder case by killing, can they? The government shouldn't be able to make someone's life a "privilege", I believe one always has the right to life. The part that states,
"This is the country after all that helped free Europe from the Nazi's" seems to overlap with a state made by Prejean,
"What, I ask, if the law which a government uses to legitimize killing is itself morally wrong, as in Nazi Germany? Aren't there, I argue, some rights fundamental to human beings-such as the right not to be tortured or killed-that everyone, including governments, must respect? Doesn't the moral foundation of a society erode if its rights as some sort of privilege, which they take on themselves to dispense for good behavior or withdraw for bad behavior?" pg. 103
I thought your article was well written, and your quotes tied in perfectly with your arguments. NICE.
-Frank
Lindsey, I can
Lindsey,
I can see how you may be swayed by the arguements displayed on YouDecide, however, I feel very strongly in opposing torture as a means of negotiation. If we go about torchering people, how can we view ourselves any less destructive than the terrorists. A life is a life, no matter who it may be and I feel that brutally harming another human being is despicable and against what we, as Americans, stand for.
-Sanders
Dear
Dear Lindsey93,
I feel the same way and I agree with you on who torture is not a legitimate means of combating terrorism.
I really liked your last paragraph where you actually suggested some ways to make things better. And i agree that tourture is not the solution. Recently, Faisal Shahzad who attempted the time square car bombing who actually admitted that he was going to attempt the bombing so if it was that easy for him to admit then anyone could do it with out torture!
Thanks for writing I look forward to seeing what you write next, because I like how you persuded this extreme topic.