If Torture Worked, Would It Be Okay?

With the release of the torture memos has come a steady parade of Bush apologists, quick to defend the CIA tactics of waterboarding, walling, and stress positions. Mind you, these same individuals, most notably Dick Cheney himself condemned the actions of Lynddie England and the other soldiers involved in the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. What had been dismissed as the isolated acts of a few bad apples is proving to be systematic and deliberate policy crafted in the upper-most echelons of power and utilized by both the CIA and the US military.

Those apologists have asserted, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, that torturing some prisoners uncovered useful intelligence. Only the Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair concedes that there is no way of knowing whether or not this useful intelligence could have been obtained in any way short of torture and within the bounds of the law.

It’s that question- does torture work- that is currently at the heart of the debate surrounding the release of those memos. But the larger question to ask is, so what? If torture worked, would that make its use acceptable?

Because the actions of the Bush Administration officials shock every standard of decency and look more and more like sadistic retribution rather than altruistic patriotism we miss the opportunity to really delve into the moral question of how far is too far and how much abuse is too much abuse. Certainly many of us feel that such a boundary shifts, depending on the stakes of the fight. This is the “ticking time bomb” scenario bandied about by pundits, the Jack Bauer fantasy where suspense coincides with commercial breaks.

Thankfully the framers of our Constitution did not have Fox dramas in mind when they detailed the limits of the reach of acceptable government conduct in connection with legitimate law enforcement means, nor did those crafting the Geneva Conventions flinch when faced with the arduous task of balancing past horror with future protections. Rather, they made a moral decision that under no circumstances were governments to act in a manner that fundamentally disregarded the basic humanity of us all. Efficacy means nothing in the face of senseless brutality.

Let’s hope that the chorus grows louder, the calls stronger, and our will more directed to really take a good hard look at the darkest corners of our past. We owe it to ourselves, our soldiers, and our fellow citizens of the world to reaffirm, once again, the basic dignity of mankind. Reaffirmation is thus a two-fold process: remedy the damage done and shore up again from future abuses. In pedestrian terms this means investigations, prosecutions, and a revisiting of our own criminal and international laws.

In the meantime we must definitively answer neither the political nor the legal question billowing around the release of these memos– we must answer the moral one. If we accept as a basic premise that the ends justify the means, that torture is okay because of some elusive net benefit, then we have more in common with our jihadist enemies than we’ve admitted before. If that is the moral position we stake, we cannot condemn suicide bombings, child soldiers, or human trafficking. Are these really the values we share?

Read more: civil rights, geneva conventions, torture

art makes me smile via Flickr

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Merle t.

4:47AM PDT on Apr 27, 2009

We are at War with those who commit attacks on US.

send a green star

Carol H.

12:43PM PDT on Apr 25, 2009

If I were being beaten up and other things I would say anything for them to stop even if were wrong so I don't really think it works at all.
I think it ought to be stopped TODAY but to release them NO because you never know what they might do free in the United States.

Past Member .

2:29AM PDT on Apr 24, 2009

Well said, Simon!

Craig C.

10:50PM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

United Nations is a joke look what just happened last week enough said. That goes for transnational law!!!!!! Where is the U.N on these pirates?

Bekki S.

12:05PM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

Perhaps you could have attached a poll to this to see how people here feel about the issue.

I for one do not believe in torture for any purpose. It is immoral.

If we had been acting according to the principles outlined in our constitution for the last hundred years, the world, esp the 3rd World, would be a different place. Instead our government (manipulated by those in power--corporate and otherwise) has too often raped any nation that it could, for natural resources; and participated in and encouraged terrorism in other sovereign nations. Is it any wonder we are reaping what we have sown? It doesn't matter that we aren't the only ones. But we can only be responsible for ourselves, and our own government-- instead we would rather mess about with other countries. What is that about the mote in one's own eye????

Fredric Frank M.

9:44AM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

NEVER and damn you for even suggesting that torture would ever work. All those that committed torture must be put in jail for the rest of their miserable lives; including George W. Bush.....

Pat P.

8:47AM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

I think torture is deplorable in "ANY" circumstances! People who are in favour of this method of extracting information better consider if it was there father, brother or sister being tortured in some other country under false pretensed or for any other reason, who would be the first one to raise their hand then?
I dont think anyone would, you would give ANY information to get out of the situation you are in, and if you are honest with yourselves you know that is true!
Torture brings no one any good, only harm!

8:35AM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

If it worked, I think we need it. Yet, I do think torture is used on U.S. prisoners by other countries....when this stops, I will be opposed to our using it.

Glenna J.

5:39AM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

Dudley, if would call it torture if it was being done to one of our soldiers - then it it torture when it is done to the enemy. I know that in the past, terrible things have been done to our guys and we said it was wrong, and that it was terrible. How then does it make it OK?
As for the UN - we have anti semites right here in America. We have hatred right here and people who are racist, who hurt animals, who rape and torture and maim. We can not just say that the UN is...and pat ourselves on the back. IF TORTURE IS WRONG, THEN IT IS WRONG & IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IS US OR THE ENEMY.

Dudley S.

3:46AM PDT on Apr 23, 2009

I know this is a liberal sight and you might not want to hear from me, a conservative, but here it comes.
The United Nations is not some place I would look for my morals. It is filled with people who are Anti Semetic and won't even acknowledge the holocaust was a real event.
Torture, if that is what you want to call what we did to the accused terrorists who occupied Git Mo, is needed in some situations to obtain information from the enemy. I know some of you would ask about the United States having an enemy but we do. Our enemy is those who attack the United States of America. How about the vicious and unneeded attacks of 9/11. I refuse to forget and I also believe Obama has been a traitor to our country by his apology tour of different nations calling the United States arrogant, releasing the forms of torture and by closing Git Mo. He should be impeached before he performs any more acts against the United States.