Yes, I believe you are right, there are worse things going on behind closed doors than waterboarding. The trouble is, there are worse things being planned by terrorists behind closed doors that threaten our lives.
It’s horrid for the “average” citizen to cope with the idea that people are tortured for information. We are not exposed to such cruelty, and we do not accept such cruelty. But, I believe we are being naïve in thinking this is not necessary, until we know all the facts. But is it our responsibility to know these facts? I don’t think we have the capacity to understand the requirements of fighting terror, because we have been protected from atrocities such as this and rightfully so.
I personally can’t cope with the idea, but before I become self righteous and claim the world should be honourable in every way, I’d like to think my freedom today is due to the fact maybe someone (pre, during or post war) had to do the unthinkable, and for that, I am truly grateful in my sheltered little world.
That is a diffcult question. Torture is a absolutely a terrible thing that should never be done to anyone. I think that tortureing a suspected terrorist is the wrost thing that can happen. IF torture was to take place ( i am not saying it should ) it should be done ONLY if the government has hard core proof. Like having the suspected terrorist on vidoe talking to a known terrorist. But this goes back to what you said about is one life wroth thousands? and to this question i would have to say no. Now that you think i am a terrible person let me attempt to explain myself. I do think torture is a terrible thing that should never be used but if it was a worldly or MAYBE even a national crisis and thousands or millions poeple were giong to die, in this situation I believe hurting one to save thousands , is logical. But ONLY if the government has hard core evidence showing that an attack was about to take place.
No, never is torture okay. Never, for no reason, under no circumstances, ever is it okay. I don't think that it is a tough one, either. In my opinion, it's obvious.
Even if the only way to stop terrorists is to know information that can only be obtained by torture should torture be used. Those using the torture on the terrorist would becoming terrorist themselves, and that option is unreasonable.
In my opinion, no form of torture is justified. It's just completely against human rights. In a nation as wealthy and well-developed as America, the mere idea of waterboarding is completely horrific. There's a key word in the name of people who are subjected to it -- SUSPECTED terrorist. There's no guarantee that everyone who's tortured like this actually has any information. I'd like to think that Western civilization has moved beyond on that, but maybe not. If you're torturing somebody, where do you draw the line? Is it okay if you stop before they die? Or are they on a similar level if torturing somebody is pushing them to want to die? How can we be so up in arms about terrorists killing people when our own society is subjecting people to torture? I think the "War of Terrorism" isn't named at all accurately. We're not fighting one country here. This isn't one physical thing that we can take out. It's a multitude of layers of different groups and different motivations. If we're fighting and killing people, how can we call ourselves any better? Perhaps in theory we're trying to make a better world, but in reality, how can we be so sure that we're doing something morally right? I'm using "we" here because it seems to be what the majority of society supports without knowing the full details. No form of war is ever a one-sided thing, one some completely innocent while the other is pure evil. I think it's time that we really looked at what we're doing before we can really see it as a completely black and white thing.
It’s horrid for the “average” citizen to cope with the idea that people are tortured for information. We are not exposed to such cruelty, and we do not accept such cruelty. But, I believe we are being naïve in thinking this is not necessary, until we know all the facts. But is it our responsibility to know these facts? I don’t think we have the capacity to understand the requirements of fighting terror, because we have been protected from atrocities such as this and rightfully so.
I personally can’t cope with the idea, but before I become self righteous and claim the world should be honourable in every way, I’d like to think my freedom today is due to the fact maybe someone (pre, during or post war) had to do the unthinkable, and for that, I am truly grateful in my sheltered little world.
Even if the only way to stop terrorists is to know information that can only be obtained by torture should torture be used. Those using the torture on the terrorist would becoming terrorist themselves, and that option is unreasonable.
I'd like to think that Western civilization has moved beyond on that, but maybe not. If you're torturing somebody, where do you draw the line? Is it okay if you stop before they die? Or are they on a similar level if torturing somebody is pushing them to want to die? How can we be so up in arms about terrorists killing people when our own society is subjecting people to torture?
I think the "War of Terrorism" isn't named at all accurately. We're not fighting one country here. This isn't one physical thing that we can take out. It's a multitude of layers of different groups and different motivations. If we're fighting and killing people, how can we call ourselves any better? Perhaps in theory we're trying to make a better world, but in reality, how can we be so sure that we're doing something morally right?
I'm using "we" here because it seems to be what the majority of society supports without knowing the full details. No form of war is ever a one-sided thing, one some completely innocent while the other is pure evil. I think it's time that we really looked at what we're doing before we can really see it as a completely black and white thing.