Can torture be justified?

[Merging Cultures]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27387040

 

Nearly 30% of people in the UK believe torture can be justified, according to a survey by Amnesty International.

 

Seems low to me. I definitely think that it can be justified to look after the majority.

 

But then again I am a spy 

[Guest MattP]

Only in extreme circumstances.

 

An example would have to be like someone had information about where a bomb was going to go off and probably kill numerous people and all other options of getting the information out of them have been exhausted.

[lavrentis]

Situation dependent.

[kingcarr21]

 based on a survey of 1000 people.

 

What would happen if all 1000 people believed it could be justified? Would this mean the report would say every single person over 18 in the UK justifies torturing?

 

These surveys always make me laugh

[Haydos]

Only in extreme circumstances.

 

An example would have to be like someone had information about where a bomb was going to go off and probably kill numerous people and all other options of getting the information out of them have been exhausted.

 

Basically this. Unless someone can argue otherwise I would feel that someone who would not disclose information relating to an example like this would forfeit their human rights.

[DennisNedry]

Yes.

 

If by water-boarding a terrorist you can extract information from him that could save the lives of innocent people then go for it.

 

I'd go a step further (probably on my own here) and allow torture as a punishment for the Ian Huntley's or Michael Adabalajo's of this world.

[ElusiveEd]

Some of the websites I look at seem to indicate that it is.

 

But I have a feeling this is not what you mean. 

[bovril]

Debatable whether it actually works and if the information obtained through torture is reliable.

[ozleicester]

No, Never.

[Guest MattP]

No, Never.

 

Your kids are in the school of girls who have been kidnapped in Nigeria.

 

You have the bloke who knows where they are but won't give it up, he has been known before to give up information under torture.

 

The government offers to use it to help you get your family back before they are sold as sex slaves for this mans accomplices to profit?

 

Decision?

[Fox in the North]

Only in extreme circumstances, but obviously tge laws on the use of torture would get bent by those who have the power. Game of thrones has taught me many things

[ElusiveEd]

Your kids are in the school of girls who have been kidnapped in Nigeria.

 

You have the bloke who knows where they are but won't give it up, he has been known before to give up information under torture.

 

The government offers to use it to help you get your family back before they are sold as sex slaves for this mans accomplices to profit?

 

Decision?

Great point! 

 

I know my answer.

[Jon the Hat]

As a policy of course Torture is not acceptable.  On the other hand, in extreme circumstances where time is short and lives are on the line, we should not criminalise armed forces etc who use it for a limited focussed purpose.

[Harry - LCFC]

When numerous lives are at stake the cost of making one man suffer doesn't sound so awful. I don't like the idea much but you do have to weigh it up against the damage that will occur if you don't go ahead with it.

[Guest MattP]

In reality I think we all know torture is still a widely used method by probably most armed forces, the guys I have spoken to who have served in the middle east over the last few years have told me some stories that would concur with it.

 

All these rules and regs regarding it etc are actually only there to please the politicians and the soppy liberals who will never have seen a war zone or even had a playground fight in their lifetime. It gives the politicians a chance to look noble and moral saying their forces abide by the Geneva convention etc even when they are sending young men out to their deaths and inflicting tyranny on the people of a country that has nothing to do with them.

 

I doubt many wars throughout history have been won without gaining some pretty vital information through these methods and I imagine they still do.

 

If it makes people feel better thinking it doesn't happen then so be it, but I think we all know when it comes to war in reality there are few rules if any.

 

These rules probably do more harm than good anyway, in the words of an ex soldier "thanks to the uproar over Guantanamo you can't take them in now, you have to get what you want out of them and then put in their bullet in the head out of sight"

 

They'll just throw the odd unlucky soldier in prison every now and then to make it look like we do the right thing, bravo all.

[leicsmac]

Leaving aside the ethical debate for a moment, as a tool for extracting information it's never 100% reliable anyway. I know if I ever found myself in that situation I'd say any story I liked to get the pain to stop, and keep doing it. If they know enough to corroborate my story and find it to be false then they probably have enough information to not need me anyway.

Psychological techniques and threatening loved ones is often much more effective than physical pain. If you're on the clock then that might not work either, but I think if you're up against a true fanatic and the situation is the clock is ticking too much to use alternatives you've probably lost already, despite how effective last minute torture seems on TV shows.

So no, for purely practical reasons I don't think it's justified.

As an addendum, no civilized country should ever consider torture as a form of punishment.

[Merging Cultures]

In reality I think we all know torture is still a widely used method by probably most armed forces, the guys I have spoken to who have served in the middle east over the last few years have told me some stories that would concur with it.

 

I doubt many wars throughout history have been won without gaining some pretty vital information through these methods and I imagine they still do.

 

I agree. It happens and has saved millions, we just don't know about it. Well, I do... but I can't tell anyone.

[leicsmac]

In reality I think we all know torture is still a widely used method by probably most armed forces, the guys I have spoken to who have served in the middle east over the last few years have told me some stories that would concur with it.

 

All these rules and regs regarding it etc are actually only there to please the politicians and the soppy liberals who will never have seen a war zone or even had a playground fight in their lifetime. It gives the politicians a chance to look noble and moral saying their forces abide by the Geneva convention etc even when they are sending young men out to their deaths and inflicting tyranny on the people of a country that has nothing to do with them.

 

I doubt many wars throughout history have been won without gaining some pretty vital information through these methods and I imagine they still do.

 

If it makes people feel better thinking it doesn't happen then so be it, but I think we all know when it comes to war in reality there are few rules if any.

 

These rules probably do more harm than good anyway, in the words of an ex soldier "thanks to the uproar over Guantanamo you can't take them in now, you have to get what you want out of them and then put in their bullet in the head out of sight"

 

They'll just throw the odd unlucky soldier in prison every now and then to make it look like we do the right thing, bravo all.

That's probably the reality, but that doesn't mean we have to like it.

[Guest MattP]

That's probably the reality, but that doesn't mean we have to like it.

 

No one is asked to like it, just to understand it.

 

I've not beenin a war zone myself, so I'll never criticise anyone who acts how they would do in that situation however horrific.

[leicsmac]

No one is asked to like it, just to understand it.

 

I've not beenin a war zone myself, so I'll never criticise anyone who acts how they would do in that situation however horrific.

"War. Is. Shit. Anyone who says otherwise has never been in one."

It is pretty amazing how humans can be such cvnts to each other at times.

[Merging Cultures]

I think it would have to be sanctioned by a court or given government/military approval. Definitely shouldn't be up to someone to decide in a stressful situation, such as a war zone.

[Guest MattP]

I think it would have to be sanctioned by a court or given government/military approval. Definitely shouldn't be up to someone to decide in a stressful situation, such as a war zone.

 

I'd imagine if you are in a a war zone the last thing in reality that would be on your mind is a court decision/permission/geneva convention etc.

[Merging Cultures]

I'd imagine if you are in a a war zone the last thing in reality that would be on your mind is a court decision/permission/geneva convention etc.

 

I'd imagine if they are after some specific information, then it would be easy to get approval to extract information at all costs before going on the mission.

 

If it is a case that a situation occurs during a war, bringing new information about a potential weapon of mass destruction, then there definitely needs to be decisions made up the chain of command.

 

Radio it in, the person gets extracted and specialist will deal with it.

[Strokes]

Yes but they should just pretend it never happened.

[Captain...]

Debatable whether it actually works and if the information obtained through torture is reliable.

 

This really, there have been a number of cases where tortured people have said whatever the torturers wanted to hear, and I'm sure in doing so have implicated innocent people.

 

Can it ever be justified, of course, like justified murder, if you kill someone who is going to kill someone else, then it is justified. If you can prevent deaths of innocents, then it can be justified.

 

In the case Matt described above though, trying to extract information about the whereabouts of the kidnapped girls, if you know he has information, then you would try any means possible, whether physical torture would be the most effective, or mental torture, sleep deprivation, torture doesn't always mean getting the hot poker out.

 

...but how would you know they knew? How could you justify the torture of an innocent man on a suspicion?

 

What if the same situation as described by Matt, but you have 2 suspects, you know one of them knows where the girls are, but you don't know which one, can you torture both of them? What about torturing 5 innocent men before you get to the guilty one? 10? 100? 1000?