Unfortunately, we live in a world of instability and unpredictability that continuously challenges the decisions we make in our day to day lives. Although people’s malicious actions can’t always be monitored or accounted for, they should at least induce severe consequences to encourage others not repeat those unfortunate mistakes. Personally, I believe that torture should be condoned when it involves heinous crimes, committed by foreign or domestic criminals who potentially threaten the safety of individual and national security. I understand that procedures such as this one need to have a strong foundation of circumstantial regulations to emphasize the importance of boundaries. Therefore, my proposal for condoning torture should only be applied in the case of life threatening matters, primarily involving suspects withholding critical evidence that jeopardizes the lives of citizens.
As we all know, terrorists have always posed a threat to our nation and the rest of the world. From past experiences, we have come to learn that any negotiation made with terrorists only gives them more power to consequently threaten us again in the future. When captures are finally made, sometimes we are still left with an abundance of gaps in between facts and evidence that only further inhibit the level of security the government can provide for the American public. Although any form of torture might oppose popular moral values, isn’t it at least worth the security and safety of Americans? Shouldn’t the government intervene and be given the opportunity to protect the public at any cost? After all, American troops risk their lives and put themselves in a dice-roll with death not knowing when danger will take its tragic toll, all for the protection our country. Why is it that we have come to accept the losses of American lives during wars, but yet not been able to condone a tactical form of protection that could possibly send stronger message to those who challenge our power and safety? If we as a society can accept cost of protecting the public, then condoning torture should not even be a question.
As we all know, terrorists have always posed a threat to our nation and the rest of the world. From past experiences, we have come to learn that any negotiation made with terrorists only gives them more power to consequently threaten us again in the future. When captures are finally made, sometimes we are still left with an abundance of gaps in between facts and evidence that only further inhibit the level of security the government can provide for the American public. Although any form of torture might oppose popular moral values, isn’t it at least worth the security and safety of Americans? Shouldn’t the government intervene and be given the opportunity to protect the public at any cost? After all, American troops risk their lives and put themselves in a dice-roll with death not knowing when danger will take its tragic toll, all for the protection our country. Why is it that we have come to accept the losses of American lives during wars, but yet not been able to condone a tactical form of protection that could possibly send stronger message to those who challenge our power and safety? If we as a society can accept cost of protecting the public, then condoning torture should not even be a question.
In Mario's his blog, he talks about whether or not torture should be allowed. He states that, "American troops risk their lives and put themselves in a dice-roll with death not knowing when danger will take its tragic toll, all for the protection of our country." I agree whole-heartedly to that statement. Some people see torture as an unreasonable solution that should be directed in a different manner. Nowadays, there might not be such manners that will be effective. In order to get the information we need to stop tragedies like 9/11 from happening, we must take every precaution starting with getting information. I do think that in order for the "torture" to be allowed, it must be from life-threatening instances. But, also if people are allowed to use the torture solution, it will be taken out of context. I definitely agree with his blog and think that he used very good examples to this question of right or wrong. It made for an interesting read and I think he did a good job!
ReplyDelete