jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (7 posts)

Is torturing someone to extract important information acceptable?

  1. writerjrose profile image79
    writerjroseposted 3 years ago

    Is torturing someone to extract important information acceptable?

  2. profile image0
    PeterStipposted 3 years ago

    No, torture is for Barbaric countries. And I'm sorry to say but America still is a barbaric country. As long as it has the death penalty, tortures and has television preachers it can't be called civilized.

    Torture is a stupid way of getting information from somebody. If you torture someone they will say anything you want to hear.
    If you ask a person under torture if he/she is a witch and slept with Satan, they will admit it.
    The only thing you get from torture is more fanatic enemies outside the prison. Every prisoner has family and relations, These friends have to control themselves not to go to extremes. But perhaps that's what America wants, more extremism like IS so it can continue it's stupid war and sell more guns and fighter jets.

    So the short answer is NO

    1. Cobrafan profile image79
      Cobrafanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The point of torture is not to act on the first thing a person says. Anyone will say anything under torture. You check the info and redo the torture. They will give up the truth eventually. And the truth can save a lot of lives.

    2. profile image0
      PeterStipposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      and what if you torture a person who knows nothing or is innocent? The people in Guantanamo never got a trial. You can easily be mistaken for someone else. By committing torture you are a war criminal yourself.

  3. Romanian profile image74
    Romanianposted 3 years ago

    No it is not. Under torture everybody can say everything that you want. It is not a good method to extract information. This method has no place in 21st century.

  4. tsmog profile image82
    tsmogposted 3 years ago

    This is pretty broad question really. I agree I think of Guantánamo since that receives most of the media hype. Who knows its use historically between kingdoms, lands, nations, and etc.

    I venture to say it is socially acceptable. After all in the simplest means we send children to their room for not telling. Most think torture as being an atrocity, yet torture is really very subjective and probably less objective. That is when 'acceptance' becomes avail. Deciding objective purposes with its priorities and considerations.

    With a tad of humor just pondering torture was torturous for me. I stopped to ponder what would be torturous for me. Again, seeking simplicity, the person accused of torturing seems to be suffering torture . . . the torture of not knowing . . . something.

    1. profile image0
      PeterStipposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      A society where torture is accepted lacks empathy and is a sick society. Torture is not subjective. That's intellectual blabla. When you waterboard or force feed someone through the anus everybody knows that that's torture. Full stop.