Question #1: What is
the percentage of accurate information produced as a direct result of
waterboarding?
Question #2: Did the
author really experience a panic attack, or was that just a metaphor?
Question #3: Is the
technique ethical even when performed on a terrorist?
I found this article to be
interesting and it was also a great topic to share with my family to see what
they think. One of the things I asked
them was whether or not they would consider the technique “ethical” if performed
on a terrorist as opposed to a murderer.
Their reactions were what I was expecting. They agreed that if such an act was performed
on a terrorist withholding information, then it would be an appropriate course
of action. When I asked them why, I also
got the responses that I was expecting.
They also seemed to agree that terrorism is unjust and no amount of
torture is too extreme. Even after
explaining to them the process of waterboarding as outlined in the article,
they still had the same views. An
interesting line I came across while reading this article was: “The interrogators would hardly have had time to
ask me any questions, and I knew that I would quite readily have agreed to
supply any answer.” (Hitchens 2) One of
the questions I almost immediately asked myself after reading that line was
what percentage of the information obtained through waterboarding turned out to
be true? Although it might be an
effective way to get someone who is quiet to talk; I would like to know how
effective it is and whether or not the information they receive on a moment’s
notice is in fact true. Another part of
the article that came to my attention was: “Steeling myself to remember what it
had been like last time, and to learn from the previous panic attack, I fought
down the first, and some of the second, wave of nausea and terror but soon
found that I was an abject prisoner of my gag reflex.” (Hitchens 2) As someone who has personally experienced a
real panic attack and has occasional bouts of panic from time to time, I can’t
help but think the author of the article is exaggerating a little. I think he meant to refer to his short term
anxiety during his personal encounter because it almost seems like he is using
the term “panic attack” out of context.
In the same situation I also asked some of my close friends on this issue if they think water boarding is necessary to receive important info from terrorist captives, and they agreed that we should, but one of them brought up a good point that if that the public is on agreement with water boarding these terrorist that it could carry over in the near future so that this form of torcher will be used on american citizens for the same reasons such as attaining information or secrets.
ReplyDelete