IS IT 'TORTURE' IF IT HAPPENS TO YOU?

user ballots

Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

would you : ethics : IS IT 'TORTURE' IF IT HAPPENS TO YOU?

[+] serious ballot by Cathexis
ACTIVE Fri Dec 09, 05 - Tue May 27, 08
A lot of people attempt to justify the Bush/ Rumsfeld actions by asserting that 'what we do isn't (technically) *torture*.'

Let's look at one of the more well-known 'controversial practices' -- waterboarding.

The current practice of waterboarding involves tying the victim to a board with the head lower than the feet so they are unable to move. A piece of cloth is held tightly over the face, and water is poured onto the cloth.

Breathing is extremely difficult and the victim will be in fear of imminent death by asphyxiation. However, it is relatively difficult to aspirate a large amount of water since the lungs are higher than the mouth, and the victim is unlikely actually to die, if this is done by skilled ... 'interrogators.'

If YOU were scooped up off the street and subjected to this, would YOU consider it torture?

Yes
No
Uncertain
Other
SORRY, THIS POLL
IS NOW CLOSED.

Ballot #84260 :
Voting Finished : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 2.0 © BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

COMMENTS:
So ... those who assert it isn't tortue ... you'd have no qualms about domestic police using the practice as a normal method of interrogation; and wouldn't complain if it were used on you?

by Cathexis on Fri Dec 09, 05 8:12am [+]

Good question. While I wouldn't call this technique "torture", it does seem that it would be extremely unpleasant.

If the government was sure that someone possessed knowledge of an immenent attack or a danger to innocent citizens or military personnel than I would condone this tactic. No one is saying they like strong interrogation tactics, but if it will save lives, then what? Spare a terrorist some extreme discomfort and let innocents die? I don't think that is acceptable.

by ceejjj on Fri Dec 09, 05 8:31am [+]

Also, before kicking me in the face, please do not disregard the fact that I said if someone were SURE a person possessed knowledge...

by ceejjj on Fri Dec 09, 05 8:33am [+]

ceejjj:

1. As demonstrated by the treatment of Mr Masri, recently, no one is ever 100% sure.

2. As demonstrated by the recent revelation that Bushco based a lot of their war rational on the results of an Al-Quaeda operative who was tortured in Egypt (and the info was false), I suggest the results are far from the panacea they are made out to be.

However, if that happened to you and you still wouldn't consider it torture ... I respect your perspective.

by Cathexis on Fri Dec 09, 05 8:46am [+]

Great ballot.

Most of us can't imagine being subjected to such horror while the world looks away uncaringly.

by xxxxxxxx on Fri Dec 09, 05 9:01am [+]

There are more effective measures than this that are less intrusive. One only has to think something is going to happen rather than it actually happening. Fear, not terror can motivate a person to comply.

by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Fri Dec 09, 05 9:17am [+]

That is a good point, Cathexis and Fiddlefaddle. I agree that most likely you wouldn't be 100 percent sure, so less extreme measures than the one described above may be a better option, such as using fear as FF said.
That said, I enjoy having the insight of people who have different positions than I. I learn and possibly change my feelings on the subject. Thanks.

by ceejjj on Fri Dec 09, 05 5:15pm [+]

Voted : Yes
I think anyone forcing you to do something and causing paralizing fear is definatly torture.

by socal_sweetie on Sat May 26, 07 7:01am [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact