Another Torture Debate

[Ender]

I do not embrace physical torture that damages the party. I have no problem with extraction of information by other means however. And I will even go far as to say that the existence of one who has knowledge that will save the many, is of little consequence in the grander scheme of it all.

I understand and share your reluctance to use the more gruesome forms of torture but you have to admit that once you use the ticking time bomb scenario to justify torture you really have no argument for putting any limits on what can be done. You have simply said that your gag point is further along than someone else’s but you are in effect accepting their argument that there is a limit to what can be done to another human being in even the most extreme situation. Mind you, I’m not saying that this is the wrong position; I’m just pointing out that your unwillingness to go all the way in extracting the information necessary to save hundreds or thousands of others undercuts the argument that the salvation of those innocent people justifies the use of extreme measures.

Ender

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

What if it works?

The debate over the effectiveness of subjecting detainees to psychological and physical pressure is in some ways irresolvable, because it is impossible to know whether less coercive methods would have achieved the same result. But for defenders of waterboarding, the evidence is clear: Mohammed cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent, only when his spirit was broken in the month after his capture March 1, 2003, as the inspector general’s report and other documents released this week indicate.

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/28/AR2009082803874_pf.html

And what does this imply about human nature, generally, that bad people can be made good by torture?