Unit 6 DQ6
Review Chapter 32. Is torture ever justified from a moral standpoint? Should it be legal in certain situations? What techniques, if any, employed by the Bush administration post-9/11 cross the line from permissible interrogation techniques into torture or CIDTP? (Minimum 300 Words).
Answer:
Torture can never be justified from a moral standpoint as it violates the inherent dignity and value of the human person. The use of torture goes against basic human rights, including the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions.
From a legal perspective, torture is considered illegal under international law and is prohibited by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. However, there may be some exceptional circumstances where the use of force may be necessary to protect lives, but even in such cases, the use of torture is strictly prohibited.
In the aftermath of 9/11, the Bush administration employed various techniques such as waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and other forms of enhanced interrogation techniques, which many experts and human rights organizations consider to be torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment (CIDTP). The use of these techniques violates international laws and treaties, including the Convention against Torture, and they are widely considered to cross the line into impermissible interrogation techniques.
In conclusion, torture can never be justified from a moral standpoint and it is illegal under international law. The use of enhanced interrogation techniques by the Bush administration post-9/11, such as waterboarding, stress positions, and sleep deprivation, is widely considered to be torture and CIDTP, and is unacceptable and prohibited under international law.
