Torture is Ethically Wrong: Analysis

Torture is Ethically Wrong abbreviationStephen D. DillehayesServing in a combat centered career in the military for al around deuce decades I have many experiences with the root of distorted shape. I have attended classes on how to apply and resist, both with variable results. But one(a) of the topics that always come up is Is torture ethically right. I believe rock skunk be broken take down into categories, how it affects the psyche and how it affects the states, which will reveal how it is fundamentally wrong. Lets look at two sides of the debate.ArgumentPremise 1 Provides info in time tenuous situations.Premise 2 The ends justify the means.Premise 3 The enemy uses it, so there isnt a reason we shouldnt.Conclusion Torture is intelligently and virtuously right.CounterargumentPremise 1 By dehumanizing someone you can collect information easier, besides this also dehumanizes you.Premise 2 Human rights are hang up by the torturer to formulate what he wants.Premise 3 Info rmation standard validity cant be trusted.Conclusion Torture is legally and chastely wrong.The first premise of the counterargument is centered on the acts of violence inflicted by the torturer. To be affective as a torturer you have to think of your victim as less than human, in order to justify the human rights violations you have to sanctify to meet any useful information. This process have been seen throughout history, the most notable is the Nazis give-and-take of the Jews in World War II. These actions can take to not only contend crimes, human rights violations but also legal ramifications which will have long term effects on the person i.e. criminal charges and psychological damage.For the second premise you have to look at human rights on a global scale. The United Nations, in 1948, wrote the habitual Declaration of Human Rights. One of the Articles contained in it is Article 5, which states No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading trea tment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free take to to medical or scientific experimentation. (UDHR, 1948). The United States of America was one of the members who helped muster in and signed this collections of rights. By denying to fall it and allowing personnel within its government or military to use torture as a mean to get information the United States government as a whole is abominable of human rights violations.The last premise can be summed up from the forces Field Manual 34-52 Chapter 1, Experience indicates that the use of force is not inevitable to gain the cooperation of witnesss for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields perfidious results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. (AFM 34-52, 1992) This statement comes from an organization, the U.S. Army, which has been at war no stop with terrorism for ov er a decade and they dont point believe torture is an effective way to get information. It is hard to get a better first hand source then that. tout ensemble of these lead to the conclusion that the argument is fundalmentally flawed. If you look at the main points you can see how they dont support the conclusion, whereas the counter argument not only supports but validates its conclusion. One, provides time sensitive information, which cant be trusted. Two, the ends justify the means, the same argument the Nazis use, which didnt make it right. Finally, our enemy use it so we should. This mindset was ban by the UN, which the US is part of, which makes the premise invalid.By looking at the record provided, which shows that torture dehumanized a person, but is globally wrong ground off of articles of the UN, there is no other conclusion then torture is wrong. Not only on a personal standard, from what it does to someone. But since the ground forces has already signed an agreement b anning it, it is legally wrong at the state level as well.ReferencesUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (10 celestial latitude 1948) retrieved from http//www.claiminghumanrights.org/udhr_article_5.htmlFM 34-52 (1992, September 28) retrieved from https//fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm34-52.pdf