Merged Senate Report on CIA Torture Program

I find it somewhat distressing that some Americans seem to be okay with the United States lowering itself to the level of the Gestapo.

Aim higher.
 
theprestige said:
I apologize for not grasping your implication. I wish you had made your position explicit to begin with.

Anyway, this idea of punishment leaves me even more confused about your morality than before. Are you saying it's immoral for a judge to issue a life sentence, unless he's willing to be punished with a life sentence himself? Punished for what? Sentencing someone?

What about jailers? Is it immoral for them to keep someone in jail, if they are not willing to be punished with jail time themselves? Punished for what? Keeping a convicted criminal in jail?

I think perhaps your moral framework around torture is circular--it's immoral, therefore it should be punished, therefore it's only moral if the torturer accepts your prescribed punishment for his immoral acts.

And who would punish the torturer, anyway? Anyone who waterboards a waterboarder is just as immoral, and just as deserving of waterboarding. In order to satisfy your morality, it would have to be torturers all the way down.

What becomes of justice in your world, if your morality demands that any act be answered with punishment in kind?
Click to expand...

I was trying to argue against the use of torture with the ethic of reciprocity. However, it seems I left in an implication that someone, somewhere would still need to use torture in order to punish those who carried out torture, when all I meant to say was that if those in the CIA who tortured actually understood what it was like to be on the receiving end of torture, perhaps they wouldn't so eagerly have gone ahead with it.

How about this? If the CIA insists on keeping its torture policy, then its operatives must be required to use the very same torture methods on each other before they are applied to prisoners. Maybe then they won't be so hasty. And if they enjoy it, well then, there's something wrong with them that's beyond the scope of this discussion.
 
sunmaster14 said:
That's irrelevant. The way you framed the issue, everything depends upon the point of view of the actor. Certainly the people in the CIA thought we were the good guys.
Click to expand...

Which brings us back to the same argument that goes: the War on Terror is just, therefore everything done in the name of fighting terror is just. Yeah. Until it isn't. Also, see above.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Whenever I'm on fire, I'm in favor.
Click to expand...

Really? Even though it would waste valuable time, require a greater expenditure of effort, result in undue pain, and prove less effective in the end than other methods of dousing the fire? Favoring dowsing when you can stop, drop, and roll is like favoring torture when you can just ask a direct question.
 
sunmaster14 said:
I pretty much agree, although each case needs to be examined carefully and independently. These should be tough decisions for the people that make them, and they should involve some degree of sacrifice. I think they have already sacrificed enough though.
Click to expand...
What? A little feces on their hands from the rectal feedings?

sunmaster14 said:
It is a serious crime. It is a crime which should be taken very seriously. That doesn't necessarily mean it should be punished harshly though.
Click to expand...
A pretty sure that's exactly what committing a serious crime deserves.
 
Upchurch said:
How does the number of lives involved make any difference? It doesn't change the chance of torture succeeding if 1 or 1 million lives are on the line.

Why not use, instead, other methods that have better track record?
Click to expand...


If anything, the more lives at stake, the more imperative it is that accurate information be acquired. Torture might get information more quickly, but if you're in such a hurry that you think you need to resort to torture, you almost certainly don't have the time to verify any of the information you'll get. And if you do have the time to verify the information, you don't need torture.
 
Corsair 115 said:
I find it somewhat distressing that some Americans seem to be okay with the United States lowering itself to the level of the Gestapo.
Aim higher.
Click to expand...

I don't really think that most of the people you are referring to have made a sound internal judgment on the (moral/ethical/legal) merits of torture itself. I think that if they did, many would find themselves on the other side of the line.
This is my faith in humans being inherently good.

I believe that the people who you see publicly pronouncing their acceptance of torture are largely displaying a knee-jerk reaction in defense of their politics which have become so pervasively partisan.

As much as i don't like to see one poster in a particular thread ganged-up on (opposing arguments are fine until responses begin to take a derisive tone) because of their opposing view, Sunmaster, you have made on statement that I feel underlines my belief from paragraph two, and i'm paraphrasing: "when it's my team that's involved, I will make exceptions".
 
I think we are discussing the wrong thing here. I don't doubt that torture is effective in some cases and might even save lives. Otherwise it wouldn't have been done for thousands of years. But the west has always abstained from it, not because it was ineffective, but because it was moral principle. We don't do this, because it is wrong, and I don't even see why this needs discussing.
 
Upchurch said:
What? A little feces on their hands from the rectal feedings?
A pretty sure that's exactly what committing a serious crime deserves.
Click to expand...

Upchurch, I found this paper too, which I think you would find interesting to read.

http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~chazelle/politics/torture09.html

I will need to re-read it more than just a few times. There are concepts in here that I need to become much more familiar with before I can really comment, but bright chaps like you, Anglo and Sun might absorb it more quickly.
 
3point14 said:
So, despite breaking international law there will be no prosecutions.

How on earth is the US going to sign any international treaty ever again with a straight face? How on earth is any country, absent pressure directly from the US, going to decide to sign a treaty with a country that clearly breaks such treaty's when it suits.

In short, how much credibility does the US administration have now?

Is it yet none?
Click to expand...

You are correct, but this is nothing new. The US has long been in the habit of breaking treaties and breaking international law except, despite citing international law as a justification for imposing its will on other countries when convenient.
 
The US is a strong advocate for the rule of law and human rights. But after "the war on terror", it will take a lot of time for the rest of the world to stop smirking when the US is condemning others for violating human rights. That leading politicians still defend torture, makes it clear that it could very well happen again if the US finds it convenient. The cost to US reputation is incalculable.
 
Ts4EVER said:
I think we are discussing the wrong thing here. I don't doubt that torture is effective in some cases and might even save lives. Otherwise it wouldn't have been done for thousands of years.
Click to expand...

I disagree, of course it does depend on your definition of effective.

If your definition of effective is to provide information that the torturer (or the person who is controlling the torturer) wants, then I suppose it is effective. The trouble is that the information may not be accurate. If I'm trying to find the members of a plot then torturing someone will no doubt yield names, many of whom may be known to be in opposition to me. I can then be justified in rounding them up and dispatching them as I see fit. Of course they may not actually be the plotters but the torture has been effective in allowing me to eliminate some rivals.

If the objective of torture is to obtain accurate and timely information which could not have been obtained by other means then I think that the effectiveness of torture has not been established.

Ts4EVER said:
But the west has always abstained from it, not because it was ineffective, but because it was moral principle. We don't do this, because it is wrong, and I don't even see why this needs discussing.
Click to expand...

The trouble with the "torture is wrong which is why we don't do it" argument (laudable though it is) is that it can be corrupted in extremis. One way this is done is to do what the U.S. has appeared to do, to use techniques which seem to be torture but just to reclassify them to justify their use. Another way is to justify limited use of torture "just once" due to the particular circumstances of the situation.

If torture isn't effective (and as I've said above, I don't think it has been established that it provides accurate and timely information which could not have been obtained by other means) then all we are doing is leaving ourselves open to using bad interrogation techniques in situations where we need the very best techniques.
 
If torture has been working for thousands of years, maybe there are some examples its advocates can point to. They need to be examples of substantially benevolent regimes, though, because it surely cannot be argued that torture is 'working' when it is being used to sustain a tyrant, not unless one is using a very narrow definition of 'working'.

This is one of the problems with Sunmaster's position. The U.S. suffers reputational harm and loss of moral authority by engaging in these practices. That has a price. Having such authority means getting your way without using more than your voice.

Others have chipped away at the article Sunmaster linked. I am no moral philosopher but I suggest there must be something wrong with an argument when it leads to unreasonable conclusions, such as that the torturers must be expected to take one for the team and insulate the rest of us from the moral consequences of their conduct.

Btw. I agree about not ganging up on people here but I think Sunmaster has been addressed intelligently and cordially overall and has responded in kind.
 
anglolawyer said:
... Btw. I agree about not ganging up on people here but I think Sunmaster has been addressed intelligently and cordially overall and has responded in kind.
Click to expand...

By and large, I agree. To your collective credit.
 
Last edited:
Corsair 115 said:
I find it somewhat distressing that some Americans seem to be okay with the United States lowering itself to the level of the Gestapo.

Aim higher.
Click to expand...

I find it more than distressing that the purveyor of 'Freedom(tm)' around the world cannot bring itself to follow the international agreements it has made and prosecute the torturers (criminals by international law) and those who ordered torture (also criminals by international law).

Were it a small, oil filled, middle-eastern nation that had shown such blatant disregard for agreements they are bound to then the USMC would even now be firing up the rotors while the president stood in front of a flag proclaiming that the world just won't stand for this sort of thing
 
Ts4EVER said:
I think we are discussing the wrong thing here. I don't doubt that torture is effective in some cases and might even save lives. Otherwise it wouldn't have been done for thousands of years.
Click to expand...



Good god man, have you been paying any attention at all???

Astrology, Dowsing, fortune telling and Tarrot cards have all been done for thousands of years...

Please join the rest of the dots yourself then go away and actually READ THE LITERATURE.



Jesus, I despair of the world when apparently those that know about critical thinking can't do it. What hope the rest of it.
 
3point14 said:
Good god man, have you been paying any attention at all???

Astrology, Dowsing, fortune telling and Tarrot cards have all been done for thousands of years...

Please join the rest of the dots yourself then go away and actually READ THE LITERATURE.



Jesus, I despair of the world when apparently those that know about critical thinking can't do it. What hope the rest of it.
Click to expand...

It's ironic that torture advocates are complaining about mistreatment on a discussion forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom