Why Is Torture Justified

The medieval times lasted from the fifth to the fifth-teenth century. It began with the fall of the western Roman Empire, as you might know. During these times the people were wanting information, or justice. Now there was more than just one device used to extract information. Some might kill the victim and some may just scar them. There were different levels of torture they would use. Such as the Judas cradle, the scavenger's daughter, the Heretic's fork, forms of neck torture, and the Brazen Bull. These are not all of the devices, but some of the popular ones used. Matter of fact some are still used to this day around the word.

Torture was common in the Middle Ages. Torture in the Middle Ages was used for various reasons and there were many torture devices in the Tower of London, including the rack.

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.

In early interrogations it was common for police officers to use physically abusive interrogation techniques such as the rubber hose to convince suspects to confess to a crime, whether they are innocent of guilty. Fred Inbau came up with a different technique that relied on presenting a large amount of fabricated or true evidence to get the suspect to confess. This technique was very effective in getting confessions, it has an 80% confession rate. Unfortunately, some of the confessions are false confessions, we do not know how many exactly. The first step of the Reid Technique, a similar coercive technique to the one Inbau devised, was to watch the suspect and determine whether or not he or she is lying during the interrogation based on behavioral analysis; which is severely flawed and does not actually help us determine if someone is lying. The police then determine if the suspect is guilty and continuously interrogate, accuse, and even threaten the suspect for hours until they confess, whether they are guilty or not. On many occasions the people who are coerced into false confessions are have severe mental impairments that prevent them from functioning as a normal person with out the impairments would.

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. Under fairness ethics, it is not fair for the torturer to deal with these consequences. To better understand fairness turn the tables around and determine if the same treatment is justifiable. Think about the invasion in Iraq, what if an Iraqis capture an American? Should Iraqis torture the American in efforts to learn which areas in Iraq need evacuation to save lives (Mayerfeld 2008)? Individuals would not be hesitant to defend the American’s rights and oppose torturing him This biased opinion develops only the basis of who is the victim. Hence, emphasizing the lack of equality when evaluating the morality of using torture.

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.

To be a good interrogator it requires more than confidence and creativity although it does help, but interrogators are very well trained in the mental tactics of social impact. An interrogators task is to get someone to confess to a crime, but it is not easy. While it isn’t easy for them, sometimes they will end up with confessions from the innocent testifies because of the expertise in psychological manipulation interrogators have. The interrogation process has been manipulated over the years and they are using unethical approaches to gain information or a confession from suspects. But in the law of confessions, it is required that confessions are not coerced but be voluntary so that it is admitted into evidence. There are ethical issues that need to be recognized in interrogation which are, the use of false evidence, the use of torture, and deceptive promises.

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. The author believes that the thoughts of enlightened societies are unwise and ascertains that there are situations whereby torture becomes morally mandatory in dealing with terrorists.

"Enhanced Interrogation" is a term that was introduced by the George W. Bush administration. This type of investigation includes physically forcible interventions, such as waterboarding, sleep deprivation, facial slapping, forced standing for days and so on. Torture has been an argument for a long time to fight terrorism, but it is a bigger issue, especially after the incident of September 11, 2001. And still, it is not over that we should use "Enhanced Interrogation" or not. The techniques that are utilized in this type of investigation they are unethically and morally wrong, but they work. In my opinion "Enhanced Interrogation" means torturing someone to get information, and that information can save thousands of lives. And it is also important

In this essay, the author suggested that it is not quite black and white to determine if torture is right and wrong. There is space for arguments to determine to what extent torture can be accepted as the right choice of action and to what extent this is not applicable.

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.

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. In addition, he informs the reader about a CIA Detention and Interrogation Program which was a study that proved interrogation techniques were not effective. This is important because he uses many statistics and poll results to back up his argument. He also mentions a poll that was

The influence of the media makes people believe everything on television, which tarnishes the credibility of the U.S. government, its military and national security. Communication has been part of human life since the ancient Mesopotamia; it 's what people use to reach anyone and everywhere. Just like humans, communication has evolved throughout the time, from cave drawings to high technology wireless devices. Nowadays, the biggest fraction of communication is what is now called the media; it 's everywhere and on everyone. 24, just like any other television shows, utilize this apparatus to its full extent to gain their expected results; more viewership, and higher ratings. The depiction of torture as the only form of interrogation hurts the

Schiemann, John W. "Interrogational Torture: Or How Good Guys Get Bad Information With Ugly Methods." Political Research Quarterly 65.1 (2012): 3-19. Academic Search Complete. Web. 08 Feb. 2016. This source explains that torture is actually one of the last methods used when they are interrogating someone since many know that it has a very low success rate. If the person is not willing to cooperate, they go down a list. Many people thought to use the top methods as they are not as immoral. Getting to the end of the list thought means they have nothing else to make the person talk which is why they use

There are many interpretations of what torture is and how something can be classified as torture. In “Believe Me It’s Torture” Christopher Hitchens talks about the United States and its various uses of interrogation tactics to get Important information from suspected terrorists. In the article the author often brings up the waterboarding tactic that is often used and how there is a large controversy over whether it is in fact torture or if it is just simply harmless. The article states, “waterboarding was something that Americans did to other Americans, it was inflicted upon and endured by the Special Forces in a form of training called S.E.R.E (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) so that they could build up a resistance to it so that they