• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

torture

Fuulie

New member
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
52
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
1,5
In my opinion, torture is never justifiable, and both mental and physical methods fall into that broad category. I don't like to see other people in pain, especially when it can be avoided. There's got to be a better way to get the information.

Besides, it frequently produces false information or nonsense from the person being tortured, who just wants the paint to stop. Or at least that's what I've read in many studies (please correct me if I'm wrong- I'd like to know).
 

TheShadowKnows

New member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
8
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7
I am betting I am one of the few people on this forum who has actually water boarded someone. It is most definitely torture. I can elaborate, but it is basically the absolute panic and suffering of drowning without the release of death.

Having said that. I believe in situational ethics. Torture is ineffective for gathering reliable intelligence. But, I never say never. I am sure most anyone can construct a scenario where they would accept torture as an acceptable sacrifice for the end they wish to achieve.

I would hope that we can build checks and balances to ensure that only the highest levels of our government can make those decisions and that to do so they must risk loss of career and freedom if they are wrong. Accountability is key.
 

Take Five

Supreme Allied Commander
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
925
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
I'm leaning towards that in general: in circumstances of imminent danger, if a person is known to possess knowledge which if extracted could prevent the danger from occurring, then whatever is necessary is permissible. I recognize the impracticalities of torture--can produce bad info--but sometimes it does work. I think when torture is regularized, systematized, and not scrutinized, then there is a big problem. I do believe in vigorously making prison conditions unpleasant, though not through physical beatings or waterboarding. Redneck has a good point with the truth serum.

Bottom line: I would not remorse its use in certain cases.
 

Felix

New member
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
32
MBTI Type
INxJ
I think the worst form of torture would be to induce someone to completely lose control of their thoughts and mind for a period of time. The damage done would be irreversible, and painful beyond anything.
 

millerm277

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
978
MBTI Type
ISTP
As far as what we've done at Guantanamo and other places....no. It is not remotely justifiable. Will I say never? No. There are certainly circumstances where it has it's purpose. If a soldier in the field captures an enemy and needs his information right NOW, do what you need to do. However, they don't exactly need to be told that, nor does the government need to condone it.

Unless we have some highly credible intelligence that someone has very time-critical information that is a major threat to national security, then torture should not be allowed under any circumstances in prisons and places of that sort. And even then, I still do not believe that it is a useful tactic, he can tell you false info as easily as true.
 

Frank

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
689
If two sides have similar strength and resources, to not torture would be putting yourself at a disadvantage if your opponent isn't playing by the same rules.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
I am betting I am one of the few people on this forum who has actually water boarded someone. It is most definitely torture. I can elaborate, but it is basically the absolute panic and suffering of drowning without the release of death.

Having said that. I believe in situational ethics. Torture is ineffective for gathering reliable intelligence. But, I never say never. I am sure most anyone can construct a scenario where they would accept torture as an acceptable sacrifice for the end they wish to achieve.

I would hope that we can build checks and balances to ensure that only the highest levels of our government can make those decisions and that to do so they must risk loss of career and freedom if they are wrong. Accountability is key.

Do you think we should change the Common Law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to accomodate this view?
 

TheShadowKnows

New member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
8
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7
Do you think we should change the Common Law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to accomodate this view?

If we could alter the law effectively it would require decisions to torture to be made by any one of say 10 top generals and executives in our government on a case by case basis with a clear signature on a memo specifying what can be done and why with copies of that order filed for future review, then it might make sense.

The truth is that if you are someone who has abducted my child and I think you know where she is. I'm going to torture you (given the chance and access). It's going to be fundamentally wrong within our justice system but I am still going to do it. Because in my opinion the information and chance to save my child is worth it the ramifications of my actions (prison sentence etc.).

Yet, I don't condone torture methods to be used by the state or police in the same situations. I might change my tune if it had to be someone's freedom and life on the line to make the call. The problem with government is that no one ever has their ass on the line.
 

d@v3

Perfect Gentleman! =D
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,830
MBTI Type
ISTJ
AQ targeted the U.S. because of Bin Laden. Why Bin Laden? Because during the Cold War, there was a war called the Soviet-Afghan war. During this war we (the U.S.) were indeed supporting the Mujahideen (in which anti-American Osama Bin Laden fought). Mujahideen fought against the Soviets (Red Army).

After the war the Osama asserted he (the mujahideen) had single-handedly brought about the destruction of the Soviet Union and that the U.S. had nothing to do with it. Obviously this wasn't true, as the U.S. and allies gave weapons and intelligence support throughout the war.

The thing that really ticked off Osama is that when the Soviets withdrew, the U.S. ceased to have interest in Afghanistan- leaving it in Civil War and not helping to rebuild or provide arms support.

And here we are today... it's basically the same war, for the same reasons, only we are directly involved rather than indirectly.
 

swordpath

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
10,547
MBTI Type
ISTx
Enneagram
5w6
Torture is proven to cause deep feelings of hatred and a need for revenge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an excerpt from a paper I just turned in about Al Qaeda's formation, financial history, why they hate the U.S., etc. The main reference was a book titled "The Looming Tower"

"III.Why is the U.S. a Target of Al Qaeda?
Two early schools of thought that fueled AQ’s desire to target America for terrorist attacks are discussed below.

A.Crimes Against Muslims and Islam
One theory that America was targeted by Al Qaeda on 9/11 begins with the torture of Islamists in the prisons of Egypt (Wright, 61). Sayyid Qutb and his acolytes, including Ayman al-Zawahiri, purportedly acquired a deep desire for revenge after their torture (Wright, 60). Although the primary targets of Islamists wrath was Egypt’s secular government, some of the anger was channeled toward the West as it was seen as an enabler of the regime that committed the torture (Wright, 60). Torture of the Islamists in Egyptian prisons was thus transmogrified into the humiliation of all Islamic society, especially to young radicals (Wright, 60). Revenge against the West was no longer retribution, it was justice (Wright, 60)."

REFERENCE:
Wright, Lawrence. (2006). The Looming Tower - Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New York: Vintage Books – A Division of Random House, Inc.
If that was so, it's kind of ironic/senseless that they employ the same methods of torture that we used/condoned.

I think torture techniques (starting with mild forms if adequate and only escalating into more extreme measures if absolutely necessary) can be of benefit in extracting important, crucial information, and obviously it depends on the situation and the severity of it. I also believe it should be done in a controlled environment as well as professionally (as ironic as that may sound). It is our natural reaction to go into a "fight or flight" state when under duress. What happens when you're unable to flee or fight? You're left on your will to survive. A majority of people will do/say anything in order to survive. I don't believe it's civil per se, but sometimes it's a necessary means to an end, IMO. Sometimes the route to justice hovers at the same level of viciousness as the actions of the transgressor. That's just the nature of the beast...
 

millerm277

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
978
MBTI Type
ISTP
If two sides have similar strength and resources, to not torture would be putting yourself at a disadvantage if your opponent isn't playing by the same rules.

Well, I'm fairly certain that no one would call AQ and the US Military equal in strength and resources. And secondly, what is one of the main reasons we're fighting? I believe it was to free the afghan people from their oppressive regime. What would be one of the hallmarks of said oppressive regime? Torture! So, we should torture too! This way, all the nice civilians who know nothing about us, will get to find out that we practice the same evil behaviors as their former government AND destroy lots of shit in their country AND kill their civilians as "collateral damage". (And thanks to us missing a lot and having bad information often, this happens sometimes even when there aren't any militants around) I'm sure this is a brilliant way to win them over to our side, and they will never get mad at our mistakes.

In short: Torturing AQ members gives our enemies a great propaganda tool that is clear to even the simplest peasant, and reduces the effectiveness of our claim that "We're better than them".
 

Nonsensical

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,006
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7
Torture bothers me a lot. Probably a lot more than anything else. It's troubling to watch it even in movies. I don't like it.

However, quite paradoxically, I would use torture.

The Natives Americans used extreme methods of torture on their enemies. It may sound barbaric, but it was necessary of survival, and was apart of their culture.

But in today's world, I don't know how it would go if I went around scalping and skinning everyone who made fun of me.

I would torture someone if they murdered a loved one. I wouldn't care. I would want revenge. But then again, I might just pop a bullet between their eyes.

In the movie Taken where Liam Neeson's daughter is kidnapped in Paris, he tortures suspects whom he is trying to get information out of. i.e- the guy he electricutes in the basement. If I were ever in his situation, I would have used torture for answers. I would have torn the fucking Eifel Tower over.

So in short, if you take away something of mine, you better be damn sure I'll hunt you down and kill you. It justifies torture and murder, in my eyes.

That's where I stand. Don't fuck with me, or I'll scalp you!
 

statuesquechica

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
428
MBTI Type
INFj
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
What would be one of the hallmarks of said oppressive regime? Torture! So, we should torture too! This way, all the nice civilians who know nothing about us, will get to find out that we practice the same evil behaviors as their former government AND destroy lots of shit in their country AND kill their civilians as "collateral damage". (And thanks to us missing a lot and having bad information often, this happens sometimes even when there aren't any militants around) I'm sure this is a brilliant way to win them over to our side, and they will never get mad at our mistakes.

In short: Torturing AQ members gives our enemies a great propaganda tool that is clear to even the simplest peasant, and reduces the effectiveness of our claim that "We're better than them".

:nice:Exactly! We have lost the moral ground in arguing for human rights' violations in other countries because of this illegal, immoral act being used on a regular basis. And the experts agree that it DOESN"T WORK.
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
Speaking in general, I think there are times where it is justified.

There are times where murder is justified, where stealing is justified, where [Insert crime here] is justified.

These times are extremely rare, and get progressively rarer based on the level of the crime. I've never witnessed myself a situation where torture was justified outside the fiction that occurs in movies. Though, if you are my enemy, and I desperately require something of you.. I'm got going to promise I will never resort to a desperate decision to gain what I require.
 

statuesquechica

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
428
MBTI Type
INFj
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The Natives Americans used extreme methods of torture on their enemies. It may sound barbaric, but it was necessary of survival, and was apart of their culture.

But in today's world, I don't know how it would go if I went around scalping and skinning everyone who made fun of me.

Actually, there is very little archaeological evidence (markings on skulls) to support that scalping was a wide-spread part of their culture before the Europeans were here, and it was a well-established practice in parts of Europe much earlier in history. Both the British and French encouraged scalping for a bounty during the war with their Native American allies.
 

Halla74

Artisan Conquerer
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
6,898
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
If that was so, it's kind of ironic/senseless that they employ the same methods of torture that we used/condoned.

I think torture techniques (starting with mild forms if adequate and only escalating into more extreme measures if absolutely necessary) can be of benefit in extracting important, crucial information, and obviously it depends on the situation and the severity of it. I also believe it should be done in a controlled environment as well as professionally (as ironic as that may sound). It is our natural reaction to go into a "fight or flight" state when under duress. What happens when you're unable to flee or fight? You're left on your will to survive. A majority of people will do/say anything in order to survive. I don't believe it's civil per se, but sometimes it's a necessary means to an end, IMO. Sometimes the route to justice hovers at the same level of viciousness as the actions of the transgressor. That's just the nature of the beast...

Brother Beat, I agree with you. I copied the passage from my paper as means for fueling the discussion here. The views of the author are not mine. If I were in charge, I would not utilize torture unless absolutely necessary. I'd put as many resources into getting good Intelligence information as timely as possible in order to curtail future risks.

I think sodium pentathol and other means of tapping into a man's mind would very well be morel likely to yield good info as compared to fear/pain/torture. JockTheMotie is right; if those dearest to me were in harm's way, and I had "Mr. Bad Guy" and knew he had info that could spare my loved one's lives, then Mr. Bad Guy is going to make some kind of deal with me.

I think most would agree with that thinking, but Gitmo was a bit much, it was a back alley Bush tactic that yielded little discernable fruit in comparison to the damage it has done. Right?
 

Nonsensical

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,006
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7
Actually, there is very little archaeological evidence (markings on skulls) to support that scalping was a wide-spread part of their culture before the Europeans were here, and it was a well-established practice in parts of Europe much earlier in history. Both the British and French encouraged scalping for a bounty during the war with their Native American allies.

I am not saying it wasn't.

And scalping doesn't always damage the skull. Often times, there are no marks upon the skull.
 

Nonsensical

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,006
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7
Actually, there is very little archaeological evidence (markings on skulls) to support that scalping was a wide-spread part of their culture before the Europeans were here, and it was a well-established practice in parts of Europe much earlier in history. Both the British and French encouraged scalping for a bounty during the war with their Native American allies.

Go rent Clearcut (1991) and then we can talk.

Clearcut (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clearcut (1991) - Plot Summary

It's about a Papermill in Canada that is cutting down Native American forest.

A young naive lawyer comes into the scene and defends the Native Americans in a heated court case. He romanticizes the Native's way of life when he has no idea.

One of the Natives kidnapps the owner of the paper mill and takes the young lawyer deep into the woods where he shows the lawyer how they run it tribal style. He tortures the owner of the paper mill in ways that I would prefer not to explain. It's grusome, terrifying, and will leave you with a real perspective of Native life.

Us whites idealize them. We have no idea.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
If we could alter the law effectively it would require decisions to torture to be made by any one of say 10 top generals and executives in our government on a case by case basis with a clear signature on a memo specifying what can be done and why with copies of that order filed for future review, then it might make sense.

The truth is that if you are someone who has abducted my child and I think you know where she is. I'm going to torture you (given the chance and access). It's going to be fundamentally wrong within our justice system but I am still going to do it. Because in my opinion the information and chance to save my child is worth it the ramifications of my actions (prison sentence etc.).

Yet, I don't condone torture methods to be used by the state or police in the same situations. I might change my tune if it had to be someone's freedom and life on the line to make the call. The problem with government is that no one ever has their ass on the line.

There is torture by an individual and torture by the State.

No Common Law State has ordered torture since 1642 escept one. And not one of the perpetrators has been brought before a Common Law Court so establishing, for the first time since 1642, a precedent.

Torture by an individual still remains a crime under the Common Law. And here we still prosecute individuals at Common Law for the crime of torture.

However a precedent has been set for the highest officers of the Land to order torture. And this leaves the way open for the individual to claim as a defence that they were following orders.

This defence was not accepted at Nuremberg and yet our most powerful Common Law State has brought ii in by the back door.

This is a step back to barbarism. And does us more harm than our enemies could hope to do.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
There are two responses here.

There is the narcissistic response and there is the mature response.

The narcissist asks what would I do in extreme circumstances? And the mature asks what is society doing?

The narcissist only thinks of themselves while the mature thinks how this will impact society.

The narcissist is immoral while the mature is moral.

The narcissist has a very narrow viewpoint, while the mature looks at the whole of society.

The narcissist thinks their own desires should rule society, while the mature thinks that society should rule the desires of the individual.

The adult narcissist is psychologically damaged and should be referred to a psychologist, while the mature should rally to the defence of society.

It's interesting that most of the posters here are adult narcissists. But this should be no surprise on a site devoted to the cult of the personality.

But we should all be warned that adult narcissism leds to the defence of torture of individuals.

Unlike conventional wisdom adult narcissism is not self love but self hatred. And this is openly expressed here in the desire for torture.
 
Top