Is torture justified?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Bowser-Mong, Feb 15, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Just been watching Nicky Campbell on BBC1. The show is dicussing whether or not torture is justified. He asked a guest on his panel, Cristina Odone, if she hought it was acceptable in certain caese and she said an outright no. Then he said that if that had been the case then 6 airliners would have been blown up with an exorbitant loss of life. Good old Colonel Bob (Stewart) is advocating its use in ceratin cases and makes a good case for its.

    What do you think bearing in mind that you may or may not be able to save the lives of many people from any information extracted?
     
  2. We need to get away from calling it Torture and give a more PC description. Something like "arduous interrogation".



    SK
     
  3. maguire

    maguire LE Book Reviewer

    torture for tortures sake or becuase the recipient is a journalist you're not pleased with (for example) - no. however, in the case nicky campbell mentions, it's a bit hard to justify *not* torturing if it gets you the information you need. several hundred innocent people's lives versus the fingernails of one scumbag - the scumbag's getting it, IMO.
     
  4. maguire

    maguire LE Book Reviewer

    'interrogation for the truthfully challenged' perhaps?
     
  5. A better question would perhaps have been 'does torture work'? Terrorists use cell and compartmentalisation of information, to make information obtained time critical, therefore out and out torture to stop a operation is unlikely make a difference.

    Resistance to interrogation techniques, are no doubt used by some players. In me opinion using torture or the implication that 'we' support torture techniques gives an enemy positive propaganda.
     
  6. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    No. Torture is never justified and it's use is repugnant.
     
  7. How about "rigorous physical questioning"?
    In my book the ends justifies the means, take no notice of this 'it makes us no better than them' argument - holding the moral high ground isn't going to keep people alive, is it?
     
  8. Fcuk that - did you see the tranny with the jawline like David Cooulthard ! :D
     


  9. And the voice to match. THAT is reason enough why torture is justified . Fcuking Freak.
     
  10. FBC - What do you think bearing in mind that you may or may not be able to save the lives of many people from any information extracted?

    We have seen from the 'gitmo stuff that association with torture is counter-productive. Use it on Terrorist A and it gets out and all the bleeding hearts will allege you used it on Terrorists B,C,D etc ad infinitum whether that be the case or not and dealing with B,C,D in a legal manner is compromised.

    There is no guarantee that the product of torture is true. Given time, it is possible to come to a 'true' or 'false' conclusion by comparing with other sources but the 'save a plane in flight' by torture scenario really only works in 24.

    All that said, there is a place for torture so long as it is non-attributable. Torture does not have to be thumbscrews and water-boards. Torture of a child or wife in presence of parent/husband can be very effective. Kill them immediately they have broken and no one knows it happened.

    So, it can be effective over time. Terrorists do not have any rules of the game - why should we? Problem is living with yourself knowing what your operatives do in dark cellers. Once started, where does it stop? Without complicating it too much, take the case of Blair. He chose short cuts outside the ethics of his position and look where we are now when it comes to trusting any of our politicians.
     
  11. Don't think the other side would have that many problems with it so its fair game I say.
     


  12. So a member of your family say a child has been kidnapped by a bunch of of paedos. You have found one of those paedos. To find that child you have to get inforamtion form the paedo. I guess from your answer that the child doesnt have much of a chance as you say torture is never justified. How about if you're aware of a major terrorist attack that has taken place with massive loss of life? Had the intelligence services been aware of that attack in advance through torure and they hadnt prevented it because their methods arent justified would you stand up and support them when the critics come out of the woodwork? What if they had prevented it would you condemn them because of how they got it? What if they had saved your life? Bet you would be happy for them to have used torture.
     
  13. spike7451

    spike7451 RIP

    I was waiting for someone to mention Castlereagh....
     
  14. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes


    No I wouldn't be happy. I'm a human and consequently decry the use of torture in any and all circumstances. That's what makes us better than others.
     
  15. Old Red Cap. I believe that torture is fully justified if it means that lives can be saved. If my family have been kidnapped then I would fully support any means used to ensure my family's survival. I even go so far as to say that I would think that I would be the one trying extract that information as regards my family. I don't condone the ritual use of torture that is so prevalent in places, like China, where it used purely for perverse reasons such as to control freedom of speech. If it is used as a way of controlling people who wish to have a better quality of life then that is of course totally unacceptable.