• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Torture

Should we torture prisoners?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 4 10.3%
  • No.

    Votes: 22 56.4%
  • Only in some cases

    Votes: 12 30.8%
  • I don't know.

    Votes: 1 2.6%

  • Total voters
    39

Gandhi>Bush

Non-Passive Pascifist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
2,742
Reaction score
0
Location
Mesquite, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Do you think it is okay to torture prisoners for the sake of gathering information to save lives, to gain strategical advantag, or anything at all? Please do not make this a thread about if the US has or has not tortured any one. I just want to have a discussion about your moral position on the matter.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No.

John McCain who was POW claimed that under extreme duress and torture anyone can break and one would be willing to make up anything just to keep from being tortured anymore.

Of course we still have to put torture into context, and I believe anything that causes pain or fear of death should be considered torture.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
No.

Why?

Because if we torture prisoners, the moral line between what we do and what our enemies do disappears. Once that happens, more people will start to question our own government and our own country. People will have to question their own beliefs and nobody wants to do that.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Oh dear, I do believe I am about to be the bad guy again. Here goes anyway...

The discretionary use of torture under strict adherence to specific guidlelines is perfectly acceptable practice. Torture used in circumstances where strategic information can be gained and for verification purposes of already suspected intelligence, seems perfectly logical to me. Torture should be conducted by a team of highly trained interrogators, always with medical personnel on hand. It should be reserved, not for the average soldier, but for high ranking POW's who would be privy to necessary information. Torture of the average infantryman is pointless and simply cruel. However, captured strategists, politicians, and espionage agents may have vital information in a time of war. It should only come along with the territory that they would be subject to forceful interrogation which would utilize physical or mental torture.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Jailman that explanation might MIGHT be perfectly acceptable depending on what exactly are the torture methhods which are used? I have no problem with a forceful interrogation but I think that torture goes way too far.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
24,969
Reaction score
5,991
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
No.

But it all depends on what you personaly define torture as.

For example, if someone was being yelled at and/or shaken to try and get him/her/it to give information (like you see on police/detective shows on TV).......that could be considered some form of mental torture by someone.

I would say almost anything short of causing the interrogation subject external/internal damage or causing him/her/it large amounts of pain (but no damage), would be torture.

Also, I would like to add mental damage, but there you get into a gray area, because some good lawyer could say you caused him/her/it mental damage by yelling at him/her/it.

There is no simple answer.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
66
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, why not. Have you not seen what happens to our (US) troops that have been captured? 99.9% of the nut bags out there don't care about "Morals or political rules" set by NATO or whom ever else. Usually when we are talking prisoners and torture its a time of WAR. There are no rules of war. What needs to be done should be done and if that includes a little pain then so be it.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Exactly my point Resident_Bitch (interesting name I might add). When it comes to morality, the line between who is right and who is wrong and who is more civilized and who is less starts to blur when we start using the same tactics of our enemies to achieve our goals.

When you start to do that, the reason for why were fighting starts to blur also and that is bad for morale
 

purplehaze

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The discretionary use of torture under strict adherence to specific guidelines is perfectly acceptable practice. Torture used in circumstances where strategic information can be gained and for verification purposes of already suspected intelligence, seems perfectly logical to me. Torture should be conducted by a team of highly trained interrogators, always with medical personnel on hand.
The whole point is that you are torturing someone because you do not know what they know. How can you possibly know if someone you are torturing knows anything important. You have to guess and this means you will undoubtedly torture people that know nothing.

It should be reserved, not for the average soldier, but for high ranking POW's who would be privy to necessary information.
So you think anyone with a bar on their shoulder that gets captured during a war should be subjected to torture based on the slight possibility they may know something? Sending the message to our enemies that we condone torture, even in extreme cases, is bad. You may argue that the enemy we are currently fighting will torture Americans either way. But this policy could hurt us in the future if we become involved in a larger conflict.
 

TurkSol

New member
Joined
Oct 8, 2005
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
of course not , they are human as well , as thou they made crimes etc ..if we torture them ..they will start a hatrens against the people outside ..and when they are out..they will be worse for the society
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
IIRC the CIA has concluded that torture is an ineffective way of gathering good information. The victim will tell you whatever he/she thinks will make the pain stop.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
FinnMacCool said:
Jailman that explanation might MIGHT be perfectly acceptable depending on what exactly are the torture methhods which are used? I have no problem with a forceful interrogation but I think that torture goes way too far.
I would say that use of truth serums and other drugs to make the subject more pliable would be acceptable. Causing discomfort in relation to living quarters, denial of privacy, isolation, sleep deprivation, short term starvation, non scarring or permanently debilitating physical pain, any form of mental torture...all of these would be acceptable. These are the risks in time of war for high ranking officers. I just dont see anything illogical or wrong about the use of some subdued forms of torture when they are performed by trained staff.
 

Gandhi>Bush

Non-Passive Pascifist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
2,742
Reaction score
0
Location
Mesquite, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
jallman said:
I would say that use of truth serums and other drugs to make the subject more pliable would be acceptable. Causing discomfort in relation to living quarters, denial of privacy, isolation, sleep deprivation, short term starvation, non scarring or permanently debilitating physical pain, any form of mental torture...all of these would be acceptable. These are the risks in time of war for high ranking officers. I just dont see anything illogical or wrong about the use of some subdued forms of torture when they are performed by trained staff.
I certianly do.

I think we should America should be the shining light of th world. I don't think it is ethical to do such things to people no matter their position of rank in an enemy army or what kind of information we might recieve.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Gandhi>Bush said:
I certianly do.

I think we should America should be the shining light of th world. I don't think it is ethical to do such things to people no matter their position of rank in an enemy army or what kind of information we might recieve.
I can understand your view, but you are also coming at this from an extreme pacifism and I am not. I am not advocating for brutal torture of every soldier captured, but I am saying that some force is acceptable to make a high ranking officer or espionage agent more pliable.
 

Gandhi>Bush

Non-Passive Pascifist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
2,742
Reaction score
0
Location
Mesquite, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
jallman said:
I can understand your view, but you are also coming at this from an extreme pacifism and I am not. I am not advocating for brutal torture of every soldier captured, but I am saying that some force is acceptable to make a high ranking officer or espionage agent more pliable.
What are the benefits of making him more pliable?
 

Donkey1499

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
56
Location
Under The Northern Star, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I say no; to physical torture anyways. Mental torture (like making someone look at a naked pic of Rosie O'Donnel) is good for if you need some info. But if they won't talk, then let them rot in prison, if you have enough evidence to convict them. But usually when someone calls fer a lawyer, they're guilty of something. But doing physical torture (like burns or beatings) should not be done by the US or anyone. It is barbaric and just lowers one's standards to the level of the enemy (in this case, the terrorists).
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Do whats needed to get the information to save innocent lives. Not all prisoners, but depending on the prisoner and the information, ya gotta do what ya gotta do
 

Gandhi>Bush

Non-Passive Pascifist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
2,742
Reaction score
0
Location
Mesquite, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Calm2Chaos said:
Do whats needed to get the information to save innocent lives. Not all prisoners, but depending on the prisoner and the information, ya gotta do what ya gotta do
No, you don't do whatever you have to do. We're America. Do we really want to be reduced to such things?
 

Donkey1499

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
56
Location
Under The Northern Star, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Calm2Chaos said:
Do whats needed to get the information to save innocent lives. Not all prisoners, but depending on the prisoner and the information, ya gotta do what ya gotta do
I'd rather kill them on the battle field than take prisoners. NO SURVIVORS!!!!
RRRRAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! :rofl
 

Donkey1499

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
56
Location
Under The Northern Star, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Gandhi>Bush said:
No, you don't do whatever you have to do. We're America. Do we really want to be reduced to such things?
I know, let's arm our military with spit balls to make ppl like Gandhi>Shrub happy! What a novel idea!!! LMAO
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Donkey1499 said:
I'd rather kill them on the battle field than take prisoners. NO SURVIVORS!!!!
RRRRAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! :rofl
DEADS DEAD.... But a dead man tell no secrets
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by Calm2Chaos:
DEADS DEAD.... But a dead man tell no secrets
Yeah, but a stupid man tortures the living with un-educated bullshit!
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by Donkey1499
Nothing's sweeter than a dead terrorist; or biscuits and gravy.... MMmmmmmmmmm..... gravy....
My, what an appropriate avatar you have.
 

Gandhi>Bush

Non-Passive Pascifist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
2,742
Reaction score
0
Location
Mesquite, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Donkey1499 said:
I know, let's arm our military with spit balls to make ppl like Gandhi>Shrub happy! What a novel idea!!! LMAO
You're intelligence is starting to show.
 
Top Bottom