After the September 11, 2001 terror attacks the George W. Bush administration authorized the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” at secret detention facilities around the world run by the defense department and CIA. The authorization approved the use of many techniques including beatings, binding in stress positions, hooding, sleep deprivation and waterboarding. In 2008 President Obama signed an executive order banning the use torture by the U.S. military and CIA. In 2016 the use of torture became a topic during the Presidential race when candidate Donald Trump suggested…
Read moreNarrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No
@9F8D65G 2yrs2Y
I'm not going to waste our time finding data and statistics. Torture is wrong. That's all the context needed.
@9F99VD62yrs2Y
I'm not going to waste our time finding data and statistics. Torture is right. That's all the context needed
@9F9R8Q62yrs2Y
Sometimes the amount of time you have isn't enough to work around the gruesome and cruel options. Only war can provide peace.
@9F9KGZW2yrs2Y
Would torture be wrong if it was towards the man who murdered your wife? If you say yes, then you have morals. However, if you say no, then you must retract your previous statement.
@9TYJFHK7mos7MO
I'm not who you replied to, but here's my answer:
I am of the firm belief that interrogative torture can never be acceptable. It violates due process, it violates human rights, and it isn't an effective method to gain anything but unreliable "confessions".
Punitive torture is a different animal. I can see how come crimes could warrant it, or how it could be an alternative to lengthy prison sentences. However, it must in accordance with sentencing by a court or tribunal, not a vigilante's whim.
In any case where the death penalty is to be used (assuming that such could be acceptable), it must be as painless and dignified as we can make it - it must be a firing squad. If either is to be justified, torture and killing must never mix.
@9FPWM4N2yrs2Y
The military is a scary place for people. Not everyone is fit for the military but for the people in it then props to them, just because you suspect an awkwardness from them doesn't mean they're a terrorist and deserve to be tortured for information. What happens if they don't answer at all, are you just gonna take an innocent life because you feel like they're a terrorist? You'd have to live with that for the rest of your life. That's all you'll hear when you have nightmares, that's all you'll think of when you're sitting in your room alone. You can't just act upon torture just because you suspect someone.
@9C6QN3Y2yrs2Y
"advanced interrogation"NO. It's torture. and torture is bad
@9FNBX5W2yrs2Y
If you made a mistake or did something that you were raised to see as normal and not know any better, would you want to be tortured for that. The terrorism is the only thing these people know.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes
@9FL8XS92yrs2Y
Torture is ineffective, as it just incentives the person being tortured to lie. If someone is being put in pain for information, and telling the truth doesn't work, people are going to do anything to make it stop. Also, it is inhumane and how could anyone willing subject someone to pain and damage?
@9FLDDS52yrs2Y
Torture is often used as a weapon against people of minority or other racial/ religious backgrounds. such as Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib etc. Leading to lifelong breakdowns of certain groups of people along with mental health issues and broken families and broken communities. No human has the right to hurt another human, unless in defence.
@9BTRV4R2yrs2Y
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, torture is inhumane, unethical, and violates the 8th amendment
@9FLPS7Y 2yrs2Y
If a terrorist has information and it is clear that they have commited the act, then they should absolutely be used as a meatbag until they waste away to the useless beings that they are.
@9FP4ZG8 2yrs2Y
The 8th Amendment only applies to American citizens, so it can not be used as a defense. It should also only be used as a last resort because it is inhumane and unethical.
@9FNR3PS2yrs2Y
The 8th amendment only applies to American citizens, so it can not be used as a defense. It should also only be used as a last resort because of it being inhumane and unethical.
@9F7PQ9N2yrs2Y
the 8th Amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment, and torture is inhumane and is a cruel and unusual punishment
@9FWDWZ9Independent2yrs2Y
Depending on the crime and the person, torture may be necessary. International terrorists who refuse to comply should be subjected to torture, depending on what their actions are and how cooperative they are.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, and we should strictly follow the laws of the Geneva Convention
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, we must use any means necessary to prevent terrorism
@9FNBX5W2yrs2Y
No matter what type of terrorism it is they are still a person. They could be a very bad person but nobody deserve read to be tortured on any level. The should pay for their crimes but not in this way.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, but only as a last resort
@9FLPS7Y 2yrs2Y
By having it as the last resort, we have already tried them and convicted them of this, so now we should go in and make sure they give us more information so that we can protect our country from future attacks.
@9FQM5MSIndependent2yrs2Y
Torture has been proven as ineffective in gaining useful information. It is also a human rights violation
@9FQKG9F2yrs2Y
@9FTFHHS2yrs2Y
Torture is all and all morally and constitutionally incorrect. It doesn't matter what the crime is, no human being should be subjected to that. It goes against the 8th amendment.
@9GNG2DW2yrs2Y
Torture has been proven ineffective in gaining useful information. It is also a human rights violation
@9FWDWZ9Independent2yrs2Y
Individuals such as international terrorists should be subjected to torture in the event that a terrorist attack is going to happen/has happened and they are not willing to comply. Torture has, and always will be an effective way to crack people and gather information.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, but only if they are convicted terrorists
@9FRPRPH2yrs2Y
Torture onto anyone is an immoral act that should never be used. If the people voluntarily give the right to torture anyone, it opens a fluid gate for a government to enact other immoral positions.
@9TYJFHK7mos7MO
Do you seriously believe that forcing someone to rot away in prison for years is somehow more "ethical" than a few lashes?
@9FNR3PS2yrs2Y
It can be difficult to get the information you need to stop further attacks from other sources besides from the actual individuals acting out terrorist actions. Which means we have to get the information from them to stop more of them.
@9GNG2DW2yrs2Y
The use of torture destroys people, clears the rule of law, undermines the criminal justice system, and erodes public trust in public institutions and the state they represent.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, allow the use of psychological but not physical tactics
@9F84C7Y2yrs2Y
Top Disagreement
Any person that is put under severe stress, whether it's physical or mental, will undeniably do anything to save themselves. This means that any answer they give is clearly under duress and can't be considered true evidence.
@9F8D65G 2yrs2Y
I don't have statistics handy, but I'm willing to bet psychological torture is oftentimes just as detrimental (if not more so) in the long term than physical torture.
@9FBKFZXRepublican2yrs2Y
Physical torture can lead to more negative consequences for the defendant's country or homeland. Psychological appeals will simply cause truth to come about without causing physical harm.
@9FCP6362yrs2Y
that may or may not be true but we have to find out information somehow and physical torture is worse than psychological and there would be no evidence of psychological torture.
@9F87BJS2yrs2Y
Torture is inherently unreliable, as answers under duress are more likely to be made to please the people inflicting torture.
Both cause trauma but the impact of psychological trauma is stronger and can stay with the person for way longer than physical trauma.
No, while not only is it ineffective, psychology indicates that a person can and will (falsely) incriminate themselves to stop the torture
@9G7L33H2yrs2Y
Yes this is protected by the fifth amendment as the right to life, liberty, and property without due process
@4P82YYH5yrs5Y
Enhanced interrogation should be allowed as well as psychological interrogation. These terrorists perform extreme atrocities on anyone, including innocent civilians. Our enhanced interrogation is child's play compared to what they do. This question should really be answered by someone under the threat of terrorism, or who has family of friends in captivity or otherwise affected by a terrorist act. You can pretty much guess what the answer will be 99.9% of the time.
@4PCJZXR5yrs5Y
We are the only country in the world that worries about being politically correct. If you go to any other country illegally and get caught, you will see horrible conditions, and not get any fair treatment. If you are believed to be a terrorist or spy in another country water boarding would be at the bottom of their lists. Other countries do much more horrible things like electrocution tactics, etc.. Yes torture is cruel, but how cruel is the planning of mass murder in the name of a religion. When you deal with animals that think a man, woman or child don't have the right to live because they don't believe in their ideology, well in my opinion the gloves need to come off.
@4P4XN9N5yrs5Y
no, this violates the 8th amendment
@4PGH6975yrs5Y
No. There should be a "bright line" between allowed interrogations techniques and anything that amounts to a war crime or crime against humanity. However, there may be discrete circumstances where there is a critical need to obtain life-saving intelligence, in which instance it is the theater commander and his/her staff's call if there is a need for crueler interrogation practices. If such actions are subsequently authorized, then the burden of accountability must fall on those who authorized such "extra-judicial" actions. If the solution saves lives and/or ends a threat, the issue of accountability may be rendered moot; if it fails OR it is learned subsequently that the threat, and thereby the enhanced interrogation measure was overstated, those involved must stand to answer for their crime.
@4NS8KYH5yrs5Y
No, and prosecute those that authorized the uses of torture (waterboarding is torture according to the Geneva convention) including George W bush and **** Cheney
@4PWMQ5M5yrs5Y
I'm with Sam Harris. Torture should be strictly banned. In world-ending-nuclear-threat situations where torture seems the only path, the ethics of preventing mass death should outweigh the immorality of breaking the law and an individual's human rights. So... it should basically never be allowed.
@4NWJXRY5yrs5Y
Yes, IF combatants of the USA use these techniques. NO, IF combatants of USA do not use these techniques.
@4PB2KT65yrs5Y
I think we should stop telling the world what we would do. Terrorists need to be afraid.
@4XV68J75yrs5Y
Yes! These are not the traditional enemy combatants that have signed onto the Geneva convention agreement. They are clandestine, guerrilla warfare zealots who will give their lives for their cause anyway.
@4Y6DQ9B5yrs5Y
99% of people tortured will tell you anything you want them to say, even if it's not true.
Deleted2yrs2Y
@5J3RHM35yrs5Y
You can't expect to win or survive if the playing fields have different levels & rules!! Simply put ! If you let it be known that you will only bring a knife to a Gunfight ---you remove fear & caution on the Enemies side!!!
@4PFYNLG5yrs5Y
Yes, and add old fashioned disembowelment, quartering, and the rack!
@4PBB76W5yrs5Y
Only when against combatants not formally associated with a recognized National military
@4P9ZNZW5yrs5Y
No, torture is inhumane, unethical and ineffective, provides a powerful recruitment tool for terrorists, and those responsible should be jailed
@4P256C45yrs5Y
No, the Geneva Convention is explicit that these forms of torture are unethical and illegal; doing so would defy international law.
@4NHP3JV5yrs5Y
Always keep in mind anything we condone to be done to others will also be done to us. Do we want our daughters and sons subjected to these techniques? If not then we cant do it to others.
@4Q34KFJ5yrs5Y
No, unless there is a known and imminent threat (like a dirty bomb set to go off).
@9DPG98N2yrs2Y
I doubt terrorist will give any information when this happens, I wouldn't be surprised if terrorist groups train for these interrogation techniques, or they don't even care if they die, so these certain techniques might be no use.
Also this says suspected terrorists, I wonder if innocent people got caught and tortured with this.
@9D4Y3KJ2yrs2Y
Do what ever is nessacary. Only if they are an actual terrorist. This will prevent more lives being lost. You have to become a monster to fight a monster.
@9BQXYKM2yrs2Y
i struggle to see here how some people say that toucher violates these suspected terrorists of their 8th amendment being broken, but most of people who throw out these amendments are the same type to say that they're not actually citizens to begin with.. so why would we be providing them our rights as citizens of the usa? on the other hand..and there's a few thoughts there.. if there is a known, convicted, ruthless terrorist in u.s. military capture, and the only way to get answered from this person/group is torture (ie: water boarding, etc.).. I believe, after being signed off as… Read more
@99DDQPP2yrs2Y
No, torture is an ineffective form of interrogation and is unethical and inhumane.
yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence that they have committed terrorist attack
@B554FCP1wk1W
Torture often only gets the response that we want and not the true response, so unless they are a very violent person who would waterboard someone else, I do not think we should waterboard them
@B4P3J594wks4W
Should use torture as a last resource only on convicted terrorist and only psychological torture, not physical.
@B4NKTTF4wks4W
Yes but the government should not be involved in other national affairs. Only terrorist suspect’s within our borders
@B4H3JT71mo1MO
Yes but only as a last resort for terrorists that are 100% confirmed to have committed a horrible terrorist attack
@B4FCJW4Republican1mo1MO
Yes, for the sake of the military, national security, freedom, federalism, capitalism, weak government, and checks and balances.
@B4FBNFT1mo1MO
Yes, in most extreme cases. Only when there is a direct threat and they have been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.
@B4D6KHP1mo1MO
Yes, for the sake of law and order, capitalism, federalism, weak government, checks and balances, freedom, national security, the military, and peace.
@B4C9NKH1mo1MO
no, torture is unethical, inhumane, and violates the 8th amendment, unless it is a foreigner or immigrant without citizenship
@B45NW89Republican2mos2MO
Yes, and ever heard of a CIA black site? This most definitely goes on there, try to not end up in one of those. Also if it is vital information, any method that is going to be used necessary to find out what is needed to be found out, also torture as a method of interrogation isn't the most reliable as it makes the person say whatever it will take to make it stop, not necessarily what they want to hear.
@B3TSK6D2mos2MO
Yes. But only if the suspect is not an US citizen and the so called “enhanced interrogation “ took place on foreign soil.
@B3LVBRM2mos2MO
Torture can result in the individual possibly committing to a crime they did not commit and goes against what the United States stands for.
@B3JBW7C2mos2MO
Yes, but only as a last resort and if there is a high likelihood that information gained from these techniques would save lives.
@B37WJNF3mos3MO
During the Bush-Cheney administration, a proposed legal theory gave the U.S. the powers to effectively torture prisoners outside of U.S. soil, in the following years current and former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officers have come forward and stated that 'enhanced interrorgation' resulted in skewed intelligence and normally would end up becoming fruitless. It is a flagrent violation of human rights and not effective in the war on terror.
@B32P6RJ3mos3MO
Not for terrorists but for healthcare insurance executives. Also crucifixion is allowed as well as skinning, gallows, scalping, and eventual public execution by guillotine
@B2TYVRX3mos3MO
yes but only convicted terrorist and only after a day threatening and then only for a minimum of hour or maximum of 12 hours physical and 24 psychological
@B2T4HT53mos3MO
No, only in the case of a confirmed terrorist, a direct threat or in a time sensitive case. otherwise its unethical and violates human rights.
Yes, but use methods like Chinese water torture that does not physically harm the suspected terrorist
@B2LRJF53mos3MO
No, because torture can produce false testimonies that may convict a person for crimes they did not commit
@B2GN7KNRepublican4mos4MO
if it is something serious like people could die 100% but if its not something that puts American lives at stake then no tortue should not be used at all for any other reason
@ArghhGeeDub 4mos4MO
Need data on effectiveness and accuracy of data obtained through torture. Likely case-by-case basis.
@B24GWLLPeace and Freedom5mos5MO
yes but only if the person is a gurrnteed convicted terrorist and even then no inhumane torture tactics
@B24D5LP5mos5MO
That is a tough one, especially when lives are at stake. Both yes and no. There would have to be Compelling evidence it was necessary before I'd say yes but that should remain available.
@9ZYNHQ4 5mos5MO
Yes, but only if we can confirm with certainty that they are terrorists, and if we need precious information to protect innocent civilians
@JcawolfsonIndependent 6mos6MO
No, torture is cruel and unusual: inhumane, unethical, and violates the 8th amendment. We should strictly follow the laws of the Geneva Convention.
@9ZB5JHJ6mos6MO
Yes, if the country that they are from is willing to do the same to Americans, then absolutely. An eye for an eye.
@9YJLK2CRepublican6mos6MO
Yes only if they provide a high danger to the entirety of the U.S or attacks based on important locations such as 9/11
@9Y8VYQF6mos6MO
No, and if enemy combatants are not responsive to normal interrogation techniques, we should go ahead and humanely put them to death.
Yes, as a last resort. But with he limitation of if they are an American citizen. That would violate the 8th amendment
@9Y49M8WWomen’s Equality6mos6MO
No, alot of these forms of interogation are inhuman, and if we have the right to not be given cruel and unusual punishments, why would we do this to a =nother human being even if they are from another country.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
