This proves that torture is effective in getting information from terrorists. Alter then argues the idea of torture about how America fells about it. He says, “We can’t legalize physical torture; it’s contrary to American values … we need to keep an open mind about certain measures to fight terrorism” (2). Porter on the other hand has a different idea about torture. He states, “Torture is an absolute evil and there can be no allowances, especially in a country which stands for liberty” (2).
There is a subtle fallacy embedded in the traditional ‘ticking bomb’ argument for torture to save lives.” Some of the U.S. leaders use the classic torture-one-to-save-many scenario to argue that torture is justifiable and sounds plausible. Some people would agree that using torture in the “ticking time bomb” scenario is justifiable, but it is hypothetical and unrealistic and bears no relation to the circumstances. The argument is fallacious and irrelevant because these situations rarely
Moore and Parker (2007, pps. 456-457) presents the reader with the article Controlling Irrational Fears After 9/11 which is an excellent of use of rhetoric in hiding premises and conclusions. The authors of the article provide a lot of arguments that use fallacies based on outrage and innuendo, which do not support many of the arguments that they make throughout. However, the authors do want to “influence our attitudes or beliefs,” (Moore and Parker, 2007, p. 117) which provides the basis for some argument exploration. Two primary arguments that are seen within the article are; 1) strategies currently used to fight terrorism are ineffective and; 2) the U.S. has over-reacted to terrorist attacks.
Instead, it can be relied on only to ensure that anyone detained will remain detained. I also explain how the U.S. Supreme Court, in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld,6 unfortunately helped lay the groundwork for the CSRT's rigged rules. I examine the rigged rules for the Administrative Review Board ("ARB"), which is set up to review annually a prisoner's dangerousness, and the rules for the military commissions, which the Bush Administration has created to make it easy to convict enemy combatants for particular war- and terrorismcrimes. Part III is the heart of the Article. I show how these rigged rules are dangerous because they negatively impact the accuracy of terrorism investigations.
In this scenario, would you resort to torture to get your information? If you did, would you feel morally justified in your actions? Ray McGovern, a former Army intelligence officer and CIA analyst brings up a famous quote in Tom Sawyer in which Tom asks the slave Jim his views on slavery. Jim proclaims: “Just because everyone says they think it's right; Just because everyone tells you it's right; Well, that don't make it right!” Torture is morally and ethically very wrong. This country certainly errs when its leaders and their
It was argued that to wait for the Japanese to surrender would have cost many lives. But would the Japanese soon have been defeated anyway by the U.S. army? Was the use of atomic bombs, weapons that instantly killed tens of thousands of men, women, and children immoral? Yes. Killing thousands of innocent people is never moral, in any case.
Some argue it was not only morally wrong but a foolish military tactic. Thousands and thousands of innocent lives were lost with the dropping of the atomic bombs, including all of the radiation and sickness that it brought. Others say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t even legitimate military targets with civilians outnumbering soldiers six to one. This counterargument could be just as effective in a debate with all of the statistics and emotions tied to
"They are trying to manipulate world opinion in a way that is advantageous to them and disadvantageous to us," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld says of the enemy. "And we need to do everything we can to make sure the truth gets out." Rumsfeld, however, makes it clear that he sees acceptable shades of gray between telling the whole truth and outright lies. "There are dozens of ways to avoid having to put yourself in a position where you're lying," he
The Holocaust There were many ways the Holocaust could have been prevented. Since Hitler was the man who led this genocide, the main thing that would have had to be done to stop the Holocaust from happening would be stopping him. Hitler made many laws against the Jews. These laws eventually lead up to the persecution of the Jews. There were many missed opportunities in which the Germans, along with other countries, could have prevented Hitler from acting on the laws for persecution of the Jews which led to the Holocaust.
Some deem this drastic event as necessary, some say it was cruel and ruthless, while others have yet to form an opinion between if it was entirely bad or essential. The atomic bombs, known as Little Boy and Fat Boy, left devastation all over Japan’s cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when two U.S. planes dropped them from above. The bombs were supposedly intended to end World War II, but yet the morality of the situation is often called into question when seeing the wake of their destruction. With any little bit of knowledge on what happened, one can become aware of the various viewpoints and grasp a new understanding of the material. These perspectives are often put into three categories: the question of “Was it truly Necessary?”, and its counter-argument, along with demolition and effects.