This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

can the detention and torture of terror suspects be advocated?

for me, one has to weigh up the suffering of one person against the deaths of many, many more. therefore, in terror cases, i would say that torture and detention is very much necessary. i know it goes against pretty much every right the person has, but in times like these morality has to be, essentially, discarded to ensure the common safety - and one can't be put off by perhaps detaining an innocent.

what does everyone else think?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Thud

I think this thread's been done before.

Reply 2

Varsity

I’m against torture in general, but there are some things I am fine with.

I have no problem with a bit of sleep deprivation for example.

Reply 3

xxlawyergirlxx

Ahh i got this question in my oxford interview for law! Typically I completely blanked and couldn't think what to say, ended up talking complete rubbish lol (needless to say I didn't get an offer).

Reply 4

hippobluecampe

Varsity

I’m against torture in general, but there are some things I am fine with.

I have no problem with a bit of sleep deprivation for example.

Sleep deprivation would kill verrrrrry slowly, hence verrry torturing.

Reply 5

Thud

Syafiquaaa

Sleep deprivation would kill verrrrrry slowly, hence verrry torturing.

Maybe they shouldn't try to blow people up then? :wink:

Reply 6

Varsity

Syafiquaaa

Sleep deprivation would kill verrrrrry slowly, hence verrry torturing.

I am well aware, but that takes DAYS. Honestly you will tell someone what you are trying to hold back long before you die of sleep deprivation.

However I am generally against even this idea, as its far too hard to create a hard and fast set of rules/laws to govern its use.

Reply 7

hippobluecampe

Thud

Maybe they shouldn't try to blow people up then? :wink:

Haha touche :smile:

Reply 8

missygeorgia

I'm completely against this. So far I know of no cases in which torture has resulted in lives being saved, and if it is allowed then there will inevitably be misuse off it; e.g. guantanamo bay.

Reply 9

Rei

Thud

Maybe they shouldn't try to blow people up then? :wink:

I think torturing Thud is very appropriate. In fact, I would pay to see it happen.

:smile:

Reply 10

U'llGetDuppied

Rei

I think torturing Thud is very appropriate. In fact, I would pay to see it happen.

:smile:

I second that, standard. :cool:

Reply 11

Thud

Rei

I think torturing Thud is very appropriate. In fact, I would pay to see it happen.

:smile:

Oh I'm sorry for not taking pity on bombers, Osama. :rolleyes:

Reply 12

jjpp

boysenberry

This logic is ridiculous; terrorists are trying to get us to change the liberalism of our society and take away our freedoms, so your response is to get rid of those freedoms and torture suspects? It's ridiculous to state 'we can't be put off by perhaps detaining an innocent' ; what if that innocent is you? are you happy to be tortured to 'ensure the common safety'? The only reason people advocate this is because they are in the majority white group and therefore know that it'll just be young muslims being tortured and not them. The idea that morality has to be disregarded makes no sense - under that sort of logic we might as well lock up absolutely every suspected terrorist arbitrarily. This happened in the 70s with the IRA, internment just antagonised the Irish community and resulted in more death.

Reply 13

2026

boysenberry

i would say that torture and detention is very much necessary. i know it goes against pretty much every right the person has, but in times like these morality has to be, essentially, discarded to ensure the common safety - and one can't be put off by perhaps detaining an innocent.

You remind me of Joseph McCarthy.

While I accept that we do face a genuine terrorist threat, I think you are grossly exxagerating it. We've faced much worse in the past, and overcame it without insulting the very values which we claim to be defending. Your position is most despicable.

Reply 14

jjpp

2026

You remind me of Joseph McCarthy.

I think that's an insult even to McCarthy :p:

Reply 15

2026

jjpp

I think that's an insult even to McCarthy :p:

Lol, when I actually re-read my comment, I thought the same thing. As horrible as the McCarthy era was, at least they did not physically torture people as this tool advocates.

Reply 16

jjpp

2026

Lol, when I actually re-read my comment, I thought the same thing. As horrible as the McCarthy era was, at least they did not physically torture people as this tool advocates.

Umm well obviously it's necessary to sacrifice our morals for the common good, otherwise we won't be able to preserve the morals that we just sacrificed :confused:

oh yeah sorry this logic is literally bull****

Reply 17

2026

jjpp

Umm well obviously it's necessary to sacrifice our morals for the common good, otherwise we won't be able to preserve the morals that we just sacrificed :confused:

oh yeah sorry this logic is literally bull****

Exactly. The logic is ridiculously flawed.

This battle, with freedom on one side and religious fanaticism on the other, will not ultimately be won with fists, but values. We have to defend our fundamental values.

Reply 18

boysenberry

but would you all be against torture if the suspect almost certainly had critical information? (perhaps i didn't bring this out clearly enough before) for me, it's a no-brainer - do whatever has to be done to get it.

in any case, i've been watching far too much 24.

Reply 19

2026

boysenberry

The point is torture is such a horrible act, especially when it's sanctioned by the State, that there has to be a strict rule against it. Otherwise you risk a slippery slope. So yes, I would be against torture in any form.