Thursday, December 11, 2014
Should the CIA use "enhanced interrogation"?
This week the Senate released a report on the use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques by the CIA to obtain information from terrorists after 9/11. It is a largely scathing report that contends the CIA mislead elected officials abotu the extent to which torture was used to obtain information. Senator Feinstein believes that these tactics are "deeply misguided," while former VP Dick Cheney says the report is "full of crap." There have been many responses to the release of the report, so what do you think? Answer the following questions AND respond to another post to receive credit.
1. Do you think that, as a policy, torture should be condoned by the US government? What if it yields only a minimal amount of usable information?
2. Do we lose a moral high ground if we use torture or do you think that we should try to obtain information to protect Americans by any means necessary?
3. Do you think the Senate should have released the CIA report on enhance interrogation? Do you think the allegations of misleading government officials or the actual torture is a bigger issue?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
60 comments:
1. If it is effective in protecting the safety of the American people, then it should be condoned, but in that case, the US should not falsely support the condemnation of torture in other contexts (the UN Day in Support). Conversely, the US should not condone it if it proves ineffective by yielding only a small amount of usable information.
2. We do sacrifice a moral high ground by condoning torture because it is hard to justify the cruel and unusual punishment of others when we protect our own citizens from that very thing.
3. I think they should have released the report - it allows transparency of a topic that is otherwise incredibly obtuse. The allegations of misleading government officials is a bigger issue, not necessarily because this is their intent but because it shows how easily issues like this can become confusing.
1. Torture should not be condoned by the United States government nor by any institution therein. America is supposed to be an ideologically advanced, democratic, and freedom-oriented nation. The use of torture not only comes into conflict with the United States Constitution’s insistence on “cruel and unusual punishment”, but it directly conflicts with the ideals on which this country was built.
2. The “moral high ground” is a part of American exceptionalism, but separate from discriminatory nationalism---the United States acting as a good moral example to the rest of the world is beneficial to all. Regardless of whether we still are in a place of moral exceptionalism, that perception still exists abroad, and it is our place to set the precedent against torture.
3. Inside of the United States, the immediate issue is more closely aligned with the government’s deception about the torture than the torture itself. This is due to a strong antiterrorist sentiment among the American people and a high degree of governmental distrust. However, torture is an issue that cannot be allowed to fade away. The methods of interrogation revealed by the Senate report prove to be quite hypocritical, and they often don’t produce results.
1. I do not think torture should be condoned except in certain cases. If the CIA is 100% sure that they will gain a lot of useful information and the person to be tortured caused great harm, then I think torture should be condoned. But if it yields only a minimal amount of usable information then it is not worth it. There are better ways to seek information in a less harmful way.
2. We do lose a moral high ground by using torture techniques. As Mr. Sharpe said in class, once we use extreme torture, what makes us different from terrorists?
3. I believe they should have. Keeping this information from the public is an injustice to Americans. I think both are equally big issues
In response to Elyse's post:
I see what you mean in number 3 when you wrote that allegations of misleading government officials is a bigger issue. Keeping the government out of the loop and using torture techniques looks bad on the CIA's part
I think torture when applied within reason and not just willy nilly, should be condoned and applied. When you're dealing with a group of people who have no moral values and who do not value human lives you may have to employ extreme measures to extrapolate useful information.
2. I do not think we lose a moral high ground. I think its more of a way to try to protect lives from being carelessly taken by a terrorist, not just torturing someone for fun, also sometimes playing the uber-moral, high and mighty card has no effect, when dealing with people who strap bombs to children's chests it's silly to think trying to be civil with them would yield any tangible results.
3. I don't think the release of the issue should be an issue, if the report did not contain anything that could be crucial to national security I think it should be made public so the citizens actually know just what the government is actually doing.
I do not think that torture should be condoned because it is cruel and humane. Even though some of the people being held in these "black sites" did some bad things, they are still people and deserve to be treated the same as others
I do believe we lose a moral high ground because since torture is considered immoral we are coming down to the same level as the terrorists so by doing this it makes us no better than them.
I believe that the CIA should of released the enhanced interrogation reports because the American people have a right to know what is going on in the country.
I agree with Drew on the topic that releasing the issue was a big deal. I like how you said that if it doesn't pose a threat to our security it is okay to publish it
1. Torture as a policy shouldn't be practiced by the U.S. The government doesn't agree with treating citizens with cruel and unusual punishment (it violates the 8th amendment) so it would be unethical and discriminatory to treat other people from other nations with cruel and unusual punishment. The U.S. should also be an ethical example for the world and harming people displays disregard for humans and humanity.
2. We loose moral high ground when we use torture because we show we our not out thinking other people. It displays a lack of awareness and intelligence when we have to harm people to obtain information. We should be using our technological advantages to intercept terrorist reports and investigate suspicious information instead of using torture for interrogation.
3. I think they should have released the reports because it reveals the issue of torture of detainees, and the government could seriously go about formulating ways to make sure prisoners are dealt with "humane" treatment and follow codes from the UN. Official being kept in the dark is the biggest issue because it shows lack of regulation within the U.S. government. How do we trust our government if the president doesn't even know what's going on, or receives contradictory information?
1. I think that torture should not be condoned unless the CIA knows exactly what they are looking for and they know that they have the right person. No one wants to be tortured for something that they did not do and if they have no idea what is going on than it should be exempt. However, if the person attacked say the white house or America’s freedom and the CIA/FBI is still looking for the rest of the people but have one, then they can use torture only if the person refuses to comply with the police. If the torture only yields a small amount of usable information then it should not be used.
2. We should try to obtain information to protect Americans by any means necessary because we need to protect the country that we call home. We don’t want to live in fear every minute knowing that someone wants to blow up or attack the country and they want to take over.
3. I think that they should have released the information because it allows us to know what the CIA is doing. Both a huge issues that need to be addressed because they both need to be fixed.
In response to Akhila: I agree with the idea that torture should not be condoned unless they know for sure that they have the right person and they refuse to answer the questions and let them know what they want to know.
In response to Kenan Tica:
I agree that it is the right for U.S. citizens to know about the CIA and torture but feel like it could be dangerous if the information is released internationally. If a terrorist found out another terrorist was tortured by the U.S. then it would only fuel hate and an American prisoner could be killed in response. The more information that is obtained by terrorists about the U.S. method's of interrogation, the more they are likely to strike.
No, the government should not condone torture as a policy. Even if it does provide a little bit of info. How can we be certain that 100% of the information "gathered" is the truth, or for that matter, save lives. It's similar to the principle that occurs when someone is twisting your arm trying to get an answer and then you say whatever you can, truth or lie, to get your arm free. The government is just using "enhanced interrogation" to get even with the wrongs of the detainee, it is not likely that a multitude of information would be conveniently gathered for the protection of the people.
We do lose a moral high ground in our own eyes, but not necessarily in the eyes of the world. Many other countries use the torture methods openly and no one really goes after their governments for it. Ultimately though,it comes down to the people of the United States that want to have America be an example and a light, not stoop to a low level to satisfy the thirst for revenge.
The senate probably should my have released the report because now it has opened up a new can of worms for the government to deal with. There is nothing really that the government can do to reverse what happened in the early 2000's, so why make a big deal of it now? It wouldn't have been debated so much if the public didn't know what was going on within the CIA. Yes, the government was misleading, but when is the government always completely clear with the public? While I personally don't agree with the CIA's idea if getting "crucial and life saving" information, I would have been more comfortable not knowing. Ignorance in this situation, for many Americans and politicians, is bliss.
abdul muizz naeem period 1b
1.torture should be and never be an option by any government or agency.it goes against the very morals Americans live by. it makes us no different than the terrorists if we perform such acts on them. torture yields no such information that can help to prevent any future attack.
2. we as americans lose our morality if we perform such inhumane acts to people who maybe our enemy. does protecting our citizens mean going to these black sites and torturing others in the name of freedom really even make sense.
3.the senate are correct in releasing these reports it just comes to show how much we can actually trust our government and agency's that are supposed to protect us when in reality they are hiding the truth which the public should know.
I agree with what you are saying regarding the fact that the U.S. should not condone torture policies. I find it interesting that you brought up the 8th Amendment which does in fact fall within the ideas of not performing "enhanced interrogation" as it would would fall within cruel and unusual punishment.
1. Yes, torture should be condoned by the US government because it protects the American people from danger. The purpose of a government is to protect its people. If it only yields a minimal amount of usable information, it is worth it if it protects the people from life threatening events.
2. We should try to obtain information to protect Americans by any means necessary because if not the nation will look weak and people will take advantage of them. We will not lose a moral high ground if we use torture because they kill many people and are very dangerous. When we torture them we are not killing them as they kill many.
3. No because that’s an internal thing that should be keep in the white house. I think the allegations of misleading government officials is the bigger issue because if you can’t trust your own people who can you trust.
1. I believe that torture methods should be condoned due to the fact that terrorists are mass murderers and most will not give out any information if they are not pushed in some sort of way. If some terrorists are less stubborn and easily answer the CIA’s questions, then it is unnecessary to harm them because they did everything that they were asked. Resistant terrorists on the other hand, need some form of a physical push to get them to talk, that way more American lives are saved.
2. We lose no moral high ground when it comes to protecting the lives of innocent American citizens. How is it wrong to only torture a group of terrorists when they killed over 8,000 people during 9/11? I believe that we should try to obtain information by any means necessary.
3. I believe that the senate should have released this information that way we can trust the CIA and know that they’re not trying to scheme anything behind our backs. I believe that misleading government officials is a bigger issue because we are supposed to be a country that is united and cares for the protection of the U.S citizens. How can we be that way if we keep secrets from even the government?
In response to Abdul: I understand where you are coming from when you brought up the 8th amendment which was no cruel and unusual punishment. However, I don’t exactly agree with your reasoning. Here’s why, speaking hypothetically, if there was a terrorist attack somewhere in America, and the CIA was only able to catch one of the members out of the terrorist group, and let’s say that member was rather resistant and refused to give out any revealing information of where the other terrorists were in America at the time. Some form of punishment would obviously need to be brought to the table in order to make that person tell so that the lives of Americans will no longer be in Jeopardy. Just asking them questions will be a large waste of time if they refuse to answer.
At Allie Snyder: Upon further consideration of the topic, i have come to the realization that torture was not employed. Depriving one of sleep, and water boarding are not forms of torture. And if the intent was torture then there would not have been doctors standing by. Torture like what John McCain endured leaves long lasting physical/mental repercussions. Sleep deprivation, defecating on ones self nor water boarding have those effects.
1. I do not think that the US government should condone torture, regardless of how much usable information is produced. Torture is in direct violation of the unlawfulness of cruel and unusual punishment as stated in the Constitution; although the Constitution does not apply to international prisoners it would be highly hypocritical to allow cruel and unusual punishment in this instance.
2. The United States would lose any moral high ground if it used torture, especially since it is outlawed in our own constitution. If torture is condoned in the US, we are no better than the terrorists we are supposed to be fighting against.
3. The Senate should have released the report because it gives citizens information about our government's practices without being a threat to national security. I think that they are both major issues; torture is wrong but the fact that the CIA knew it was wrong and therefore misled government officials is just as bad if not worse.
I disagree with Brandon's response to #2, the United States kills many innocent people (as well as the possibility of a significant number of those tortured being innocent) but we would be completely against the torture of a captured American soldier who may have killed a civilian. Such hypocrisy certainly leads to the US losing a moral high ground.
1. I don’t think torture should be allowed as an interrogation technique for a fairly simple reason. It seems that the use of torture places the lives of American’s above those of the lives of suspected terrorists, and I find it hard to agree that one life is more important than another. Regardless of nationality, people are born with the same inherent rights; to torture is to deny these rights and to go fundamentally against the main axiom of the Constitution.
2. It seems we certainly lose the moral high ground; we are, in fact, committing immoral acts to receive information. A better question is really whether losing the moral high ground is worth preserving American lives, which, as shown above, I see as inherently incorrect. People should be protected at any cost, not Americans. Granted, I do understand that this type of moral philosophy is difficult to justify by representatives of our, or any, specific nation.
3. It’s very hard to say, with such a short amount of time passing thus far, whether the release of the CIA report is helpful or not. It’s analogous in my mind to Snowden, where to say whether his actions were fruitful depend highly on their consequences years and years from the present. However, on the basis that a better analysis will come with more time, it seems reasonable that the American people (and by extension, the White House), should certainly know at least the broader terms of CIA objectives. To answer the final question then, of whether the torture or misleading of government is a worse offense, the answer clearly has to be the torture. While the misleading of the government is harmful, inefficient, and possibly illegal, the use of torture is a direct violation of fundamental human rights.
In response to Drew:
You make the claim that the people we should be able to torture are those with “no moral values and who do not value human lives.” While at first glance this may seem reasonable, what it really does is set up an arbitrary axiom for which the morality of torture should be judged against. For instance, if islamic extremists were to use this same logic they would find no fault in torturing us — in their eyes we have no reasonable moral values because we refuse to respect the Koran. In fact, the entire statement that ‘terrorists’ have no moral values is absurd and borders on racism (or at least a kind of religious discrimination) itself. Just because one moral system does not match the premises another does not mean the second doesn’t exist. Until a system of viewing the world can be proven as “correct,” it would be both more respectful and more intelligent to stop trying to qualify one moral system as more correct than others.
1. I dont think that the United States of America, the loudest advocate of human rights, should use torture as an interrogation technique. Although some information can be gained, using torture contradicts our own beliefs and contradicts the Constitution. The Constitution clearly sates that cruel and unusual punishment is prohibited, these rights should be honored of any individual. Any person should have rights regardless of where they were born.
2. Using torture would definitely lose any moral high ground that the US had. It would even lose the respect of American citizens as the US themselves showed opposition to using it, and the framers of the constitution prohibited it as well. Using torture would almost put the US at the same level of the terrorists that we are at war with.
3. The Senate releasing the report allows the citizens to have more information and more importantly shows transparency between the government and the people. Government officials come and go and trust can slowly be brought back, but torture on the other hand is hard to take back. Torture is definitely the bigger issue as it is a blatant violation of our beliefs and more importantly basic human rights.
In response to Akhila's #1 : I understand what you are saying, and my first answer to this question was exactly what you said. The problem is that no one knows if they have the right guy and the CIA is never a 100 % sure. IF they were we would probably have eradicated all terrorists by now. Even if information is gained it is not worth the blatant violation of human rights.
1. Torture is completely unethical and can be unreliable in some cases. Even if torturing suspected terrorists can get information out of them, it is not guaranteed that torturing them will result in usable information because, under the circumstances, they would probably say anything to get the torture to stop. The 8th amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment and torturing suspected terrorists goes against the ideals that the U.S. was built on.
2. We are losing a moral high ground if we use torture, even if it is to protect the nation. If we condone the inhumane acts of torture, what's the difference between the terrorists and ourselves? Torture doesn't solve the problem; it only harms more lives and it doesn't take back the lives that have already been lost. It also does not guarantee that our people would be safe against these terrorists. Furthermore, it may anger those who support these terrorists which only causes more trouble later down the road because we are creating more enemies for ourselves.
3. I think that the Senate should've released the report because the people of the U.S. should be informed about what our own government is up to. I think that both issues are extremely major, but I believe that from a moral standpoint, the issue of torture is a much bigger issue.
In response to Hrishi: I agree with the very last statement in your answer to question #1. It doesn't make sense to only apply these rights to American citizens, but when it comes to those who aren't born of this country, they are not guaranteed these rights.
1) I do think torture, as a policy, should be condoned. Even if it yields a minimal amount of information, this information can be used to save thousands of lives.
2) I do not think we lose the moral high ground. The reason being is because one, if we are torturing someone to find information about terrorists, torturing one person is different than that terrorist group killing thousands of americans. Second, in class, people brought up the fact that if Americans are being tortured we freak out, therefore why should we torture others? My answer to that is, people such as ISIS who torture americans or radical islamics who just kill us because we are americans, do not care about their friends or family being tortured. They will strap a bomb to someones chest just to kill americans so it is different than torturing americans, who most people care about. So, i do not think we lose a moral high ground.
3) I do not think they should have released the report because i think this information should be in government hands only. I think misleading government officials is a bigger issue because the high up government officials should know what is going on.
1.) Torture should be condoned by the U.S government. Torture can yield information, and can lead to lives being saved. I do think we should use torture as a way of getting information but not the only way, as terrorist could lie and create fake information to make the torture stop.
2.) No, I do not think we lose a moral high ground by using torture. In my opinion, we should fight fire with fire. The people we are dealing with are the scum of the earth and are not afraid to take as many American lives as possible. Why should we be humane with them if they are not humane with us? Our government is not out there torturing innocent people, they are torturing people with known and proven links to some of the worst terrorist organizations in the world.
3.) If the document did not have any confidential information and everything within the file was declassified at the time it was leaked then yes, i believe that American people should have been able to see what the CIA was doing. Our government should mainly be transparent with the citizens knowing what is occurring. However, I am worried that government officials were mislead by their own employees. This shows fragmentation within our government which is worry-some as everyone is not on the same page.
1. No I don’t think torture should be condoned as a policy. In the constitution it says that we cannot use cruel or unusual punishment. That should apply to our foreign prisoners too, regardless of the fact that they could be terrorists. If we torture someone to get information out of them, that breaks so many laws, what’s the point in even having any? It sends out the wrong message that our laws are only laws when we went them to be, but if you are an outsider, then we can bend the laws anyway that we want.
2. Yes, I think we lose a moral high ground if we use torture. America has come a long way and we have laws for a reason. Terrorists use torture methods on their victims, Senator John McCain was a previous prisoner of war. Why should we stoop to their level to get information, information that probably won’t even help us that much anyway? We can protect Americans without using torture methods. Some of the prisoners started to talk as soon as they were arrested. Torture was not necessary.
3. Yes, I do. The American people need to know what the government is doing. It’s “we the people”, not we the government. We trust in the government to help keep us safe, but if they don’t tell us what is going on, then how are we supposed to trust them? I think the actual torture is bigger, because these people were not just interrogated, some were deprived of sleep for 7 and a half days, water boarded, kept confined in small places, and even chained while standing up for hours on end. The tactics were unconstitutional and shouldn’t have been allowed.
In response to Elyse, I disagree with her saying that if it helps protect the U.S., then it should be allowed. However I do agree with her when she says that if it only gets a small amount of information, then it shouldn’t be allowed. I agree with her when she says we do lose a moral high ground, because it goes against our constitution, which is the basis of our Democracy.
I don't think that the US should allow a policy of torture. Even if they get information from torture, the information could be untrue or just not useful. And torture is morally wrong in my opinion.
I do believe our high moral ground by using torture. The US has a policy of leading by example to create a free world where everyone has rights that can't be taken away.
I think that its good that the senate released this report, because now people know what the government is up to and are less likely react harshly against the situation. But in my opinion, the actual torture is the bigger issue. The US has a moral example they need to follow, especially if they want other countries to follow in their footsteps.
In response to Drew: It doesn't matter how you use torture it's morally wrong, and there's always a chance that the information you gain is not useful and/or is simply a lie. It is an unreliable and hypocritical way to gain information.
1. I think that only in very specific cases that includes non-life threatening torture methods should be condoned by the United States. I feel that even if this type of interrogation yields minimal results, some intel is better than no intel. Also, if a person ends up in a situation where they are suspected to be a terrorist and is captured, then there is a decent chance they might know something.
2. I think that using torture to a certain extent would lower people's moral, but it is for a good cause. If America is too concerned with a good image then those who do not care about a good image will step all over us. The military's job is to keep its citizens safe and they must use any humane ways possible to achieve this.
3. I think the Senate did the right thing to release the video because I feel that Americans should know in what methods they are being protected. The misleading government officials is a bigger deal than the actual torture as it shows that us citizen do not know what else the government could have misled us on. If the government admitted to using some methods of torture, it have less of an impact on Americans than lying to Americans and then finding out the truth.
1. I don't think torture should be condoned by the US government. There are other ways to deal with problems other than hurting people. It also violates the 8th amendment of cruel and unusual punishment that isn't allowed. Trying to get answers out of someone by hurting them is only going to make them want to disobey more.
2. We do lose a high moral ground if we use torture, because we are looked down upon in the eyes of the world. With US thinking it is okay to use violence, it might spread and America will become hateful.
3. I don't think they should've released it. I think it would've caused more problems and some of those things are supposed to be kept private. If it was released, some people may not be happy and more torture would spread.
In response to Akhila: I agree with you on #1 and #2, but I don't think keeping this from us is an injustice. They could be keeping it from us to keep us safe.
1. While I think in some cases, 'enhanced interrogation" techniques provides information that saves lives, overall a policy that condones torture has moral ambiguity, which leads to tricky situations and dilemmas.
2. I think we lose a moral high ground by using torture techniques. We ask for mercy for US captives of ISIS/ISIL, but torture "suspected" terrorists, 25% of which prove innocent. While the detainees may not be US citizens, they are still human beings who deserve at least a semblance of justice.
3. In a discussion in a different class, someone mentioned that the Senate torture report was not for ordinary people's eyes, as it pertained to government officials. I think that the Senate was justified in its release of the report, because it brought attention to the issue, and because the American people hold the soul of the government. I think both issues dominate the report, as one issue is domestic and the other foreign.
1) I believe that we should only use torture if we/re going to get a lot of informations and if it's so important that it can save the lives of innocent people. If a minimal amount of usable information is yieldedn then no we shouldn't do it.
2) We should try to obtain informatin to protect Americans by any means necessary but we do lose some of our moral high ground. We become on the same level as terrorists.
3) I believe that if they wanted to release the CIA report on enhance interrogation they they should've reported everything and whole-truthedly. I believe that both are important since they lower our moral high ground as Americans.
1B^
1. I think that the US should not condone torture because we should take the moral high ground as a nation of power. Also torture could be considered cruel and unusual punishment which is breaking the 8th amendment. Even if the torture leads to valuable information, torturing someone is wrong and shouldn’t be done.
2. Yes, we are breaking our own rules set in place by the bill of rights to protect our citizens and harming other people, who should have those same inalienable rights.
3. Yes, I think the Senate should release the CIA report because I think the American people have the right to know what is going on. I think that the misleading is the bigger issue because the government should know what a government agency is doing. The CIA shouldn’t hide what they are doing because if it’s wrong it needs to be stopped.
In response to Olivia: I totally agree and like how you used the comparison of twisting someone’s arm to what the CIA is doing and how we don’t know if the information is true or not.
1. Regardless of the possible information obtained, torture shouldn't be condoned by our government. The United States is, or at least was looked at as a model for democracy as well as how a nation should handle foreign and domestic affairs. Even if we aren't held to the highest standards that we once were, as a nation and example to the world, we should most definitely condemn the use of torture. Regardless of the information collected, torture should never be a method used in prisoner interrogation.
2. Without a doubt, the principles of our country have a shadow cast on them if we condone torture. As a nation, we were founded on the highest morals by founding fathers like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Jay. Although the security and safety of Americans should be the top priority to our government, our security should be protected in the most humane way possible which excludes the use of torture and enhanced interrogation.
3. The honesty and straight-forwardness that has been lacking from our government was replaced with the publishing of the torture report. The same breath of fresh air to American citizens could come back to harm us, however, we Americans must cope with that possibility in exchange for transparency from our government. Despite the misleading of government officials, the torture is a bigger deal because human beings were irreparably harmed, many of whom were altogether innocent. The torture that our military and private contractors unleashed upon suspected terrorists only allowed the hatred of our enemies to grow. Despite this, the government officials who are to blame for misleading and being untruthful in regards to the terror report should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law due to the grievous nature of the subject.
I am puzzled by Tyler's response to question #3, you gave no reason to back up your statement regarding why you believe the torture report should be in government hands only. I'd like to hear your logic for the statement that you provided since we differ on how we believe the Senate should have handled the publishing or covering up of the torture report.
1. Torture is most certainly cruel and unusual punishment, which violate the constitution. So American citizens can't be punished in this way, but anyone else can? We can't just pick and choose what pieces of the constitution we want to follow. I could somewhat understand torture if it protects the lives and safety of many Americans, similar to the way we use surveillance, but in this case, no major or even true information was learned.
2. We most certainly lose out moral high ground when we resort to torture as a method of gaining information. We're not following the rights that we've worked so hard to gain and protect for ourselves. It's hypocritical to say you're against cruel and unusual punishment (as the constitution does say), but to then condone torture.
3. I think the Senate most definitely should have released the CIA report. The American people have a right to know what is going on in their country and what the government is doing. I think the allegations of misleading government officials are just as important as the torture issues. If the CIA can place a blind fold over the face of our government on as issue as major as torture, what else are they doing without the government knowing?
In response to Matthew: I agree with a lot of your points. However, I do not believe that if we lost our place of moral exceptionalism , that people would still perceive us to be a moral country. I believe they'd see us for what we did and who we were, to the most negative side.
(1B)
1. I think that torture should be considered by the U.S government when interrogating terrorist such as al Queda and the Taliban. These terrorists would not hesitate to kill innocent Americans if they had the chance so why should we treat them "humanely". Minimal information that we get from these interrogations could save hundreds of innocent Americans lives, so I think we should use torture on terrorists to protect the greater good.
2. I think we should try to obtain information to protect Americans by any means necessary because if we worry about moral high grounds then innocent people will die. Trying to worry about morals against terrorists who have no morals will not save American lives.
3. I do not think the Senate should release the CIA report on enhance interrogations because it just causes unnecessary chaos. Misleading government officials is a bigger issue because that could be signs of corruption within our government. The actual torture is not an issue as long as it leads to information which can save lives. Lying to the American people though to loses Americans faith in the government.
In response to Kathryn Nealey, the 8th amendment is not related to terrorists because the Constitution only applies to Americans.
1. Torture should not be condoned by the US government by any means, especially if it's only going to yield minimal, usable information. Akhila says it should only be used by the CIA if they are 100% sure they will receive a large amount of information from the person being tortured, but I don't believe they can be 100% sure. There's no way our CIA can be sure because even though a picture places someone at the site of a scene, there could be a different story. It may look very suspicious, but suspicions don't guarantee anything. I don't think we should use torture as a method to getting answers, period.
2. The US absolutely loses a moral high ground when torture is being used to obtain information, even though that information could be used to protect Americans. There are always other tactics aside from violence. Americans teach their children not to use violence to get what they want and I don't see why there should ever be excepetions to that. I agree with Akhila as she says that when we use torture we are no better than terrorists. Americans do not want their soldiers or people being tortured by other countries so we should not torture other countries peoples; these countries might still torture our men and women but we should not stoop down to their level.
3. The Senate was right in releasing the CIA report on enhance interrogation because they're letting us know what's going on in our country. The people have a right to know what their country is up to. I believe the allegations of misleading government officials is a bigger issue because our country is suppose to be one united front, not a country that keeps secrets from each other and cause turmoil within ourselves.
1. Torture shouldnt be condoned by the US government because it is not always effective as it seems and as a nation who protects its citizens and fights for their protection when they are caught in dangerous situations, we shouldnt be condoning something that we dont agree with when it is happening to our own people.
2. In a way I agree with both stances. Torturing is bad but at the same time it is the best measure thta can be taken in order to get needed information.
3. Misleading government officials is a bigger issue because they have more of the power therefore if theyre mislead and act on something, it can permanently cause problems. They should have released the CIA report because it could have uncovered information and made the public more aware.
I agree with Akhlias stance on the governments position on torture because it is a valid point supporting the act only if the person in custody of being tortured can lead to the resolutions that are being looked for.
1. I do not think that torture should be used by United States government due to the fact that it completely refutes amendment 8, no cruel or unusual punishment. Using torture to get information may seem like it would work, but it is completely inhumane to beat someone to try to get any sort of information that may not even be reliable.
2. We do lose a high moral ground if we use torture because if we decide to use torture as a method we are stooping down to the same level as terrorists that we are are trying to protect our own citizens from.
3. I think it should be released due to the fact that as citizens we should have the right to know what is going on in the America. Both the allegations of misleading government officials and the torture are equally as important and they are issues that need to be resolved or at least tended to.
In response to Allison: I completely agree with your point on wanting to protect the place we call home; we should not have to fear countries wanting to attack America if we choose to use the torture method.
1. Torture is one thing that should not be condoned by the US because it is inhumane and people may be offended by this controversial topic. If it yields only a minimal amount of information for Americans, then it is all the more reason as to why torture should not be condoned.
2. Americans lose high moral ground by torturing people because we would also be seen as a country that that kills others and only protects our citizens.
3. The Senate should have released the CIA report on enhanced interrogation because the public would be better informed. The allegations of misleading government officials is far lesser of an issue than the actual torture itself because it is inhumane to torture someone for information that the US may possibly not even acquire.
In response to Zach, I agree with his opinion that torture should not be condoned because morality is very important. Also, it is true that, "the American people [should] have the right to know what is going on", because it would only cause turmoil within the nation if everyone is clueless.
1. I personally believe that torture should not be condoned. If torturing 1 person can save the lives of millions of people, then it should be used.Its a matter of saving many lives of innocent people, instead of having a slight risk for people to die since you didn't want to torture the person being interrogated.
2. We should try to obtain information from the American people because some people can try to take matters into their own hands. Which in return can cause more problems in the future. Its better to keep the information classified and not leaked to the public.
3.I don't think the senate should have leaked the information about the CIA out to the public, because it gives too much information that could start some problems for America. I believe that the actual torture is a bigger issue than misleading government officials.
In response to Zach
I think the Senate should not have leaked the information out about the CIA because it can cause problems for America depending on how people respond to the leaked information.
1. As harsh as it ay seem the U.S. needs to take precautionary measure in order t protect the livelihood of Americans. These men who are at the center of the issue have committed heinous acts of violence with little, to no remorse. In my opinion simply trying to reason with these detainees won't yield any valuable information; if more physical measures are taken, chances are they will provide useful information. This has been proven as a result of Osama bin Laden's death.
2. Yes, I think we do lose a moral high ground because America constantly chastises other countries for their human rights violations, yet they also do the same thing.
3.The Senate definitely should not have released the CIA report on "enhanced interrogation" because not only does that provoke other nations, mostly in the middle east, but it also puts the lives of troops, ambassadors and other Americans in jeopardy.
In response to Drew's post, I agree with what he believes about torture. It's not something that should be used recklessly, however if you're dealing with people that have no regard for human life, in my opinion it shouldn't matter. The only part I disagree with is his idea about to release of the CIA report because in doing this, it will definitely provoke others especially in the middle east.
1. I personally believe that torture should not be condoned by the United States government or its agencies. This is because it disproves the 8th amendment, no cruel or unusual punishment. As well it is not always as effective as it seems. How do we know that the information being given to us through this torture is reliable and truthful.
2. The United States would lose a moral high ground by the use of torture to gather information. Other various ways can be used to approach the situation rather than through violence.
3. In my personal opinion the Senate had every right to release the CIA report on enhanced interrogation. This allowed for the public to become more aware on the matter going on. The allegations of misleading government officials is a bigger issue. This is because our country should be open and upfront with each other not hiding things which leads to distress.
I agree with Akhilias point on the governments position on torture. This is because she made a statement that we are no better than terrorist if we condone the use of torture to obtain information.
1. I do not believe that torture should be condoned by the US government. There is no guarantee that the government will obtain any useful information through torturing people. There is also the possibility that in condoning torture, innocent will be subjected to it.
2. We do lose a moral high ground in condoning torture for the simple fact that we protect our own citizens from cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th amendment. Yes, terrorists are willing to torture our citizens, but does it make us any better than them if we then use the same techniques? Additionally, the use of torture will take away from the image America as a whole has set for itself.
3. I do believe that the Senate should have released the CIA report because as American people, we have the right to know what is going on in the country. I feel that misleading government officials and the actual use of torture are both big issues that need to be addressed.
IN response to Akhila, I agree that there are less harmful ways to obtain information as the use of torture can result in the harming of innocent people.
1. I do believe that torture should be condoned by the US government if it can possibly save the lives of our people. Even if it only yields a minimal amount of usable information, this information can be used for further investigations.
2. I do not believe we lose a moral high ground if we use torture because our nation's number one priority is protecting our people and if the only way is to use torture, then so be it. Also, other courtiers are capturing our people and torturing them so why shouldn't we do the same?
3. I definitely think the Senate should have released the CIA report because it is unfair to keep this information from the public and leave our people in the dust. I think both are big issues but allegations of misleading government officials is the main issue;what is a stable society without truthful information and people we can rely on?
In response to Sharon Bradley's answer to #2, I agree that we lose no moral high ground when it comes to protecting the lives of innocent American citizens. I also completely agree that it is far from wrong to torture terrorists who have killed mass populations in situations such as 9/11. I believe in an eye for an eye.
1.) Torture shouldn't necessarily be condoned in US government. If it provides minimal results, then the government should find other mechanisms that will provide efficient information. I can see to a small degree a need for minor torture, but not anything excesses.
2.) When torture becomes just cruel, and just for meaningless purpose, then that's when we stoop to a level below the high attitude and self awareness that America is supposed to have. There can still be a sense of morale when trying to obtain justice.
3.) I believe the CIA should have released the information. There's entirely too many secrets and undercover workings in America. Of course, some issues can't necessarily be released, but some topics should be known. The torture and misleading officials is an issue, not as big as some other issues, but definitely should be taken in high regard and dealt with.
In reponse to Nia, I agree that as Americans we should know what's going on in our domain. Not informing the public of what's going on causes a much larger problem later.
1. Torture should not be condoned by the United States government in my opinion, torture is inhumane and it is addressed in the bill of rights. Amendment 8 discussed about cruel and unusual punishment and that's exactly what torture is.
2. Yes of course we loose a moral high ground if we torture, although I complt agree that the protection of Americans is highly important...to torture of other human beings is not correct.
3. The senate should have released the report from the cia of the enhanced interrogations, citizens should have the right to know what is going on and how the government is handling our nations security. In response to the second question, torturous is the bigger issue.
In response to dani: I complelety agree with her point of views especially with her answer to question number three because I believe as well that Americans should have the knowledge of what's going on.
1. I do not think that torture should be condoned as a U.S. policy because it is not worth the retaliation. You can't fight fire with fire. If the information is minimal, it's definitely not worth it, and there's no guarantee that it will yield the usable info.
2. We do not lose a moral high ground because the U.S. isn't really looked at as an "Angel" country. We've participated and even caused a multitude of tragedies, minute or groundbreaking. We should try to obtain information through alternative tactics.
3. I do think that the Senate should have released the CIA report because what is being done needs to be revealed. I feel that misleading government officials are a bigger issue because while torture effects us as well, government officials directly effect us. They impact us more because our entire government system is in their hands. They are who we look to for security as far as finances, equality, and foreign affairs. If they are deceiving or confusing, it's not safe.
(1B)
1)If the enhanced interrogation is going to to help and save American lives then is should be condoned. But if we will get nothing out of the method than we would be hurting people for no reason and in such a case should not be condoned. If we only recieve a small amount of useful info then how is torture to help.
2)Honestly we should try to protect the American people by any means necessary. I understand that torture could be a sacrifice of morals but if the torture is against someone who murders without thought then by any means its better to save as many lives possible at any cost.
3)I think that they should not have released the report because they have just stirred up another problem in America on top of the many others already stacked up. I think the allegations of the misleading government officials is the bigger issue because the American people put their trust in the government officials and if the report just "had" to be released it should have been in line with what the officials said not a controversy.
And in response to Kortnea, I think the that the Senate should not have released the report. She said that they should of but honestly I feel like trouble is rising because of the report and that some things should be kept behind close doors if it truly is not hurting or effecting the American people.
1. I do not think that torture should be condemned by the U.S. government. Even if it only uses a minimal amount of information because it is wrong, unless you are a criminal who is trying to destroy exclusive information, there is no need for torture.
2. I believe that the government should try to obtain information by any means necessary because that information is sacred, if it gets out into the wrong hands it could destroy the U.S. nation all together.
3. I believe that the Senate should have released the CIA report because it would have enhanced our knowledge on what was going on, but it is not a major issue in my opinion. I feel like both misleading government officials and actual torture are both equally important.
Yet, as Lindsay said if the government officials are keeping stuff from the president who knows how much they keeping from the citizens of our nation. This is a major reason why there is a lack of trust given towards our government and why people strain away from politics.
1. If torture only yields a minimal amount of usable information, then I don't think it should be condoned by the US government. If it doesn't play a vital role in safety, why is it okay to put someone through excessive amounts of pain? Torture is a way to terrorize a group of people for no legitimate and urgent reason so I do not think that the US government should be condoning it especially if it is against terrorism.
2. We do lose moral high ground if we use torture. Citizens of the US openly oppose torture tactics by other nations, for the most part, because it is seen as immoral. It does not make any difference because we are the US. In a sense, publicizing the use of the torture tactics is a way to tell the rest of the world that we support their actions. When protecting Americans though, realistically speaking, I do not think that morality has much significance.
3. I don't think that the Senate should have released the CIA torture report because in a sense, I think it has done more bad than good. It has brought awareness on the inhumane treatments of the US government, but realistically speaking, it has not made much of a difference. Many people are actually supporting torture being used in order for them to be safe. I do think that both of the issues are on equal ground because one speaks about the role of morality in our nation while the other speaks about the fragmentation in the government.
1. I believe that the option to use torture should be maintained by the U.S However I believe it should only be used in situations where all other possible resources have been completely exhausted, and there is an immediate need to protect American lives. A minimal amount of information, that does not solve, or help solve an immediate threat, is not worth torture. In the Senate Report, it is said, many of the tortures were done without their being a pressing need for information.
2. I believe we do lose a moral high ground by using torture, but I also feel that when all preferable options are unsuccessful, saving American lives is worthy coming down from that pedestal. While I don't believe it should be used routinely, I feel there are circumstances where tortute is the only viable option. I disagree with Bryce Gall's response to this question, as I feel that maintaining high moral and ideals simply is not practical in all circumstances.
3. I completely agree with the senate's release of these documents. It is necessary for the American public to be aware of what its government's agencies are doing. I feel that while the tortures are awful the fact that civilian officials were unaware is much worse, as it impedes the ability to prevent these acts in the future.
1) I believed that the US government should resort to torture as the last resort therefore it should not be condoned. As Americans we are held up to higher precedents and that by using resulting to torture, we aren't living up to that precedent anymore of being a country people look up to. Also people who are tortured can assume that they will die, if they know they will die, they won't release information and may take that information with them when they die. Therefore the torturing was pointless.
2) It is vital that the government should be informed of any information that pertains to the United States and its people especially if they are in danger. We come first out of all people. However, I strongly believe that when we resort to torture, we loose the sense of that "high moral ground" because we are smart enough to figure out other ways.
3) The CIA reports should not have been released in my opinion. It's not that it is being kept a secret or that the President is being kept in the dark, I think it is for the safety of the people. Often times we don't always need to know the business of what is going on. If is important to know, then they would release it. The reports should be known to those of that specified job.
In response to Dipayan and Lindsay:
I agree that if prisoners who are in the United States prisons should still have to follow the 8th amendment. If people are tortured, those officials are violating the 8th amendment. There are other ways, like Lindsay said, to get information out of these people. We have the technology to intercept terrorist messages and attacks, we need to use them.
1. I believe tortue should be condoned by the U.S. because it keeps the people safe. Tortue should only be used as for something major and not minor.
2. I think we do lose moral high grounds if we do use tortue. Yeah it is to protect the people but we are doing the same thing every other country is doing and it doesn't benefit us.
3. I think the Senate shouldn't have released the CIA report on enhance interrogation just for the fact that it might hinder the safety of people. I feel like the public should know about certain things but there is always things you shouldn't let the public know about and it has done more harm then actually help.
1. No it shouldn't, however, it depends on the severity and what information they receive/ can receive. If the information is very useful and can save a lot of lives, then it may be worth it, but if the information can be found from another source, we should go with the alternative.
2. I believe we lose some moral high ground, because torture is never acceptable. But, i think the severity of the information, or the consequences if we don't find out information may make torture worth is, but it doesn't make the act any better or justify it in any way.
3. I think they should've released the document because keeping things from american citizens, when it concerns them and their well being (torturing for information to protect Americans) isn't beneficial for anyone. I think torture is a huge issue, however keeping secrets is a big issue as well.
In response to Drew's post: I disagree with his response to number 2 because I believe people will view those who torture, even for good cause, differently. And other people might begin to compare us to terrorists who do the same thing. I understand where Drew was coming from, however, I believe that we DO lose moral high ground.
1. No, torture should not be condoned by the US government because it is cruel and immoral. There are probably some less evil and effective ways to get information out there that do not involve interfering with someone's life in such a negative way. If torture obtains only a minimal amount of information,then that makes it even worse. I do not see the point of mentally and physically hurting someone just for a small benefit towards out nation.
2. WE do lose moral high ground if we use torture openly; however, I think we should use it if the situation is drastic and we can hide it.
3. I do not think the Senate should have released the CIA report on enhanced interrogation because it caused too many unnecessary problems. I think the allegations of misleading government officials is a bigger issue because those are our leaders that are in charge of such issues.
In response to Haley, I agree that we do lose moral high ground because it makes us look like other countries. We have no right to make ourselves look like the superior nation if we act just like the other countries 'beneath' us.
1- I do not believe that the US government should condone torture. If a philosophy is broken in order to be maintained in another aspect, then it is not legitimate. The USA was established on the philosophy of equality and rights and freedom. Enhanced interrogation entirely contradicts this philosophy. False information can also easily be provided which would not be valuable.
2- I believe that we are losing a moral high ground when using torture in order to gain information. Equality, rights, and freedom are three major principles that the USA would not have been founded on had the founders not believed in their value. If these are the main United States values, then torture is hypocritical and inhumane.
3- I believe the government should have released the CIA files because citizens should have a right to know whatever the government knows. It would be better for them to inform their own citizens before their citizens discover the truth.
Post a Comment