Waterboarding

[flip_flop]

If we assume, for the sake of the argument, that George Bush is telling the truth in his memoirs where he says the use of waterboarding prevented a number of terrorist attacks, including attacks on Canary Wharf and Heathrow, then the ends justify the means, don't they?

[sandyRoe]

Torture is torture, whatever it's called. I think it very unlikely that waterboarding has actually stopped any terrorist attack.

[naomi24]

Loosehead, on a question like this I disagree - it's hypothetical - but there's nothing wrong with qualifying a view. However, the people I'm referring to haven't given a view. They've simply overridden the original question with other questions.

Sandy, I agree. I think it unlikely it ever stopped any attacks.

[woofgang]

Torture is torture and torturing terrorists makes us as bad as them. Its also the first step on a slippery slope and no, in this case if it were true, the end would not justify the means...Now if you had asked if I would torture a terrorist to save my family's lives......

[jno]

Bush's credibility is beyond question, isn't it? WMDs and all that. And likewise the security services - they're the men who stare at goats, the ones who tried to kill Castro with exploding cigars.

[123everton]

The information would have to considered for it's value, but the ends don't justify the means.
Torture only adds to the problem, civilised people don't use torture.
Bush's presumption is that there is no other way, but actually there are better ways of interrogating people.
What Bush won't tell you is that 1 in 19 Iraqi men have been arested since the invasion, many of them completely innocent, how many were tortured?
How many perfectly innocent Iraqi men were arrested, tortured and then joined the cause? How many others based on these stories (these true stories) followed suit.
How many of our own soldiers have been killed and wounded as a result?
Terrorists aren't created in a vacuum, torture merely ups the ante putting more people at risk.

[123everton]

That should be 1 in 10 Iraqis.

[jno]

good point, 123everton. If our government decided to torture everyone in the country they'd uncover quite a few planned crimes and save some lives. But would the ends justify the means?

(Hypothetical question. Of course.)

[sandyRoe]

And if our police were allowed to torture suspects the clear-up rate for crime would be near 100%.
But if it was where would all these new convicts be kept?

[modeller]

#Torture is torture # But what is torture .? Being denied a cigarette., a drink, a drug.
Being interrogated hours on end. Being deprived of sleep . Being threatened with violence to yourself or your love ones . W
None of this things actually harm you physically but crimes throughout the world are solved and prevented by their use.

[naomi24]

Everton, //What Bush won't tell you is that 1 in 19 Iraqi men have been arested [since the invasion, many of them completely innocent....... That should be 1 in 10 Iraqis//

How come you know then - and where were they arrested?

[McMouse]

In my view the ends do not justify the means if you wish to retain moral integrity. Torture is abhorrent and should have no place in our country.

[ludwig]

I don't really understand why the people who think the answer is no, just don't say no.

[modeller]

mouse S

[modeller]

mc mouse So you would ban interrogation .

[ummmm]

You have a point Doc....

[McMouse]

Modeller........There is a difference between interrogation and torture, but the problem is that many people don't see a distinction.

[ludwig]

Waterboarding's definately torture. The issue is can torture ever be justified - If you knew that you could stop 100 people being murdered by torturing 1, would it be justified? It's a perfectly legitimate hypothetical question.