Is it justifiable to put suspected terrorists under great physical duress?
Charles Krauthammer believes that the lives saved by the information extracted from terrorists justifies the use of torture to obtain that information. On the other side, Andrew Sullivan argues against the necessity and effectiveness of torture. I agree with Sullivan that it is not justifiable to put suspected terrorists under great physical duress. In Sullivan's article "The Abolition of Torture," he speaks out against politicians like George W. Bush who endorsed torture because of a "military necessity." According to Sullivan, torture is "cruel, human, and degrading," not something that the U.S. should be a part of if it claims to want peace and justice in the world. Torture is not only morally wrong, but also goes against the basic principles of freedom that the United States was founded on. It takes away people's self liberty. Another argument against torture is that it yields highly unreliable information. People being tortured are willing to say anything just to make the torture stop, even lies.
We need to stick to our principles and stop the torture. If we don't, how will American prisoners of war be treated in the future. We are being hypocrites and going against the fundamental principles America was founded on.
