The US should allow the limited use of torture

Torture is done in order to either (1) to obtain a confession; (2) to obtain information; (3) to punish; (4) to coerce the sufferer or others to act in certain ways [1]. If these four results end up preventing more suffering than the act of torturing the initial victim caused, torture becomes morally permissible. This becomes my opponent’s framework: achieving these four goals would result in defusing a bomb that would kill a multitude of people. Pro proposes we ought to torture a person in order to negate the threat because it prevents more suffering in the long run. I will argue that we should not torture someone to negate the threat because the suffering caused by torture does not outweigh the suffering it prevents. Who wins this debate will come down to which option the judge decides to choose. My offensive impact comes from (a) the immorality of torture itself; (b) violation of individual autonomy leads to authoritarian governments; and (c) torture gives extremist groups a tool to recruit more members.Torture is inherently immoral in that it causes suffering to a sentient being and violates autonomy. Me and my opponent both agree that suffering is inherently immoral; thus this is a concept we do not have to explore farther. I won’t provide any quotes or anything, anyone reading can look those up if they are curious. Individual autonomy is a necessary value to liberal societies. Having the government be allowed to intentionally violate the autonomy of its citizens quickly cascades into the authoritarian dystopia featured in Orwell’s 1984, USSR, Nazi Germany, etc. A government that allows the systematic violation of its citizens’ autonomy leads down a slippery slope to tyranny and authoritarianism, which, if we read history, results in tens of millions of lives. This would result in more net suffering than a hypothetical bomb would cause. Terrorist organizations have been using incidences of torture as a major propaganda tool to recruit more members. Human Rights First has compiled over 30 examples of ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Taliban, and numerous others using this technique to make them a more effective fighting force. Restricting their most useful propaganda tool hinders the organization's’ strength. Doing so is important as these groups cause massive suffering. ISIS alone caused the death of 21,000 people in 2015 alone [2]. Thus, we ought to not allow torture in order to weaken extremist groups, and in effect, saving thousands of lives. My opponent’s framework lies in the fact that limited torture is sometimes morally permissible (ticking time bomb scenarios), thus these instances ought to be allowed. This reasoning is false in a variety of ways. My opponent's case assumes that torture is effective in achieving its goals. Pro’s only examples of torture ever working is of a sergeant being abducted by Hamas. Yet, if you read the source that Pro cites, it only mentions that, “Israeli intelligence captured and interrogated the driver of the car in which Wachsman had been abducted and learned the location where he was held.” Note the word “interrogated.” The driver was never tortured, only interrogated. Interrogation is merely asking the person questions [12]. By the definition provided in R1; interrogation does not equal torture. Pro’s source claims that it is “implied” that the Israeli intelligence used “severe torture” because the Landau model (Israeli interrogation policy) allows limited use of torture. Yet a quick Google search finds that the Landau model, “strictly forbids all forms of torture or maltreatment.” [13]. The report provides no evidence that the model was ever broken besides a nonexistent interview quoting Prime Minister of Israel. Which seems even more unlikely given the Prime Minister would be directly breaking the law, as well as the fact that the Prime Minister was assassinated a year before the Landau model even came out [13]. The second example Pro cites is John Mccain talking about how he gave up information to his captors. This does not necessarily mean that he was tortured, as it doesn’t say he was tortured; it merely says he gave up information; in fact, John Mccain was never even tortured while in North Vietnam [14]. Pro later cites the incident of Sri Lanka wherein three terrorists had planted a bomb in Colombo. The story comes from a random anonymous Sri Lankan army officer. The army officer lied to the reporter as the bomb was found by a, “passer-by, who noticed a suspicious device wrapped in a plastic bag and alerted police.” [15] It's also important to note that without torture, the terrorists are less likely to even join the extremist organization in the first place. Thus causing preventative treatment to these kinds of situations. So in the end, Pro fails to show how torture is effective in achieving its goals. This is problematic, for torture has to be effective in order to resolve the ticking time bomb scenario Pro’s entire case lies on. Pro fails to warrant the claim torture is effective, thus his case is negated. Furthermore, torture takes time to plan out the different techniques, as well as actually break the will of the victim. For example, Philip Zelikow, senior lawyer for the Bush administration writes that it took three months for the CIA to actually plan out the torture techniques to use on Abu Zubaydah [3], and that the actual torture would take 30 days [4]. Other tortures took 7 weeks [6]. The problem is that it takes long stretches of time to break the victim’s will, which would make torture entirely ineffective at stopping a ticking time bomb scenario. Neuroscience has also found that torturing someone makes them less likely to tell the truth through the chemical and physical changes that occur in the brain due to the presence of extreme pain and stress. Professor Shane O'Mara writes,“Given our current cognitive neurobiological knowledge, it is unlikely that coercive interrogations involving extreme stress will facilitate release of truthful information from long term memory...on the contrary, these techniques cause severe, repeated and prolonged stress, which compromises brain tissue supporting both memory and decision making." [7] In other words, torturing someone will make the victim less likely to tell the torturers the desired information than when the victim is not being tortured [5]. As a result, the use of torture is not helpful in resolving Pro’s proposed scenarios. The question then becomes, is something better than nothing? The answer is nothing is better than something because of the false information the victim will give. As the top US interrogator says from years of experience in torture, “When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them, that means the information you're getting is useless." [8] Sociology backs this up too: one study done by Saul Kassin and Katherine Kiechal found that in 69% of cases the torture victim gives false information [9]. The results were later verified completely by Jennifer Perillo and Saul Kassin [10]. In the end, torture is more likely to make the ticking time bomb scenario worse than actually resolving it. In other words, we ought to not use torture in a ticking time bomb scenario. Thus, torture should not be allowed in that instance. Referring back to the beginning of the debate; the suffering torture causes outweighs the suffering it prevents namely because torture does not prevent any suffering. In fact, torture not only doesn’t attain the goals, but it also makes the goals more difficult to attain. Thus, there is no justification to weigh against the inherent harms of torture. Thus, torture ought not be allowed. [1] http://tinyurl.com...[2] http://tinyurl.com...[3] http://tinyurl.com... (page 23) [4] http://tinyurl.com... (page 233)[5] http://tinyurl.com...[6] http://tinyurl.com...[7] http://tinyurl.com...[8] http://tinyurl.com...[9] http://tinyurl.com...[10] http://tinyurl.com...[11] http://tinyurl.com...[12] http://tinyurl.com...[13] http://tinyurl.com...[14] http://tinyurl.com...[15] http://tinyurl.com...[16] http://tinyurl.com...