2008 Woodie Awards
The Greyhound Editorial: Waterboarding approval questionable
Issue date: 4/15/08 Section: Opinion
On Wednesday, news sources reported that President Bush's senior advisers approved, "enhanced interrogation techniques" to use on al Qaeda suspects by the CIA. Sources in high office have orated that top advisers now are in favor of CIA interrogation techniques for Al Qaeda suspects. Some of these methods include sleep deprivation, slapping, pushing and the simulation of drowning, called waterboarding.
Waterboarding consists of laying a victim down on their back with their head inclined in a downward position as water is poured over their face. This stimulates the affect of forced suffocation and inhalation of water, and the victim will often believe that death is imminent.
In the past, Bush and other administration officials have condemned the use of torturous techniques to gather information from suspects in terrorism. The fact that that this administration has now chosen to "allow" such techniques publicly shows a systematic disregard for the traditions and morals Americans hold close, as well a dishonesty that has proven more clear and predictable year by year.
Torture has long been a level to which the US has not stooped in war situations, as a source of traditional pride. In a situation of torture, a victim can easily proclaim any information, true or not. The level of anxiety and fear may drive people to admit something, anything, as long as the terror stops. This does not seem to be an accurate method of obtaining information. There have been no proven positive outcomes to interrogative systems of torture, at least none that result in permanently concluding any major wars, recent or past.
There is also the question of humanity. As students at a Jesuit college such as Loyola, we should be outraged, if not at least disturbed by policies put forward by the leaders that represent us in Washington. We are taught to think of the consequences of our actions, especially on a moral standpoint.
When faced with the idea of torture as a possible future for war, it is questionable as to whether or not it is worth reconsidering such ethics to trudge forward. Instead of using "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding to aid the U.S involvement, we should rely on the high standard of intelligence and reasonability that has helped the country gain anti-terrorism knowledge in the past.
Hopefully, this decision will not result in any major depletion of moral and reasonable standards in both international and national information gathering.
Waterboarding consists of laying a victim down on their back with their head inclined in a downward position as water is poured over their face. This stimulates the affect of forced suffocation and inhalation of water, and the victim will often believe that death is imminent.
In the past, Bush and other administration officials have condemned the use of torturous techniques to gather information from suspects in terrorism. The fact that that this administration has now chosen to "allow" such techniques publicly shows a systematic disregard for the traditions and morals Americans hold close, as well a dishonesty that has proven more clear and predictable year by year.
Torture has long been a level to which the US has not stooped in war situations, as a source of traditional pride. In a situation of torture, a victim can easily proclaim any information, true or not. The level of anxiety and fear may drive people to admit something, anything, as long as the terror stops. This does not seem to be an accurate method of obtaining information. There have been no proven positive outcomes to interrogative systems of torture, at least none that result in permanently concluding any major wars, recent or past.
There is also the question of humanity. As students at a Jesuit college such as Loyola, we should be outraged, if not at least disturbed by policies put forward by the leaders that represent us in Washington. We are taught to think of the consequences of our actions, especially on a moral standpoint.
When faced with the idea of torture as a possible future for war, it is questionable as to whether or not it is worth reconsidering such ethics to trudge forward. Instead of using "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding to aid the U.S involvement, we should rely on the high standard of intelligence and reasonability that has helped the country gain anti-terrorism knowledge in the past.
Hopefully, this decision will not result in any major depletion of moral and reasonable standards in both international and national information gathering.
Be the first to comment on this story