Ridge - US 'should not rule out torture'

HeXp£Øi±

HeXp£Øi±

Well-Known Member
The former head of the US Department of Homeland Security has said torture may be used in certain cases in order to prevent a major loss of life.

Speaking to the BBC, Tom Ridge said the US did not condone the use of torture to extract information from terrorists.

But he said that "under an extreme set of circumstances" such as the threat of a nuclear attack, "it could happen".

It comes a day after the US was accused of eroding human rights by campaigners.

Prisoners shackled

A report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) criticised the US over the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq and the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Shocking pictures last year alerted the world to abuses at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, and there have been numerous allegations of abuse and torture by former Guantanamo Bay inmates.
One FBI agent described in a memo seeing prisoners at Guantanamo shackled, hand and foot, in a foetal position for up to 24 hours at a time, and left to defecate on themselves.

The US defence department has announced a new investigation into the allegations.

It has condemned the abuses in Iraq and says it is prosecuting those responsible.

Mr Ridge told BBC News 24's HARDtalk: "By and large, as a matter of policy we need to state over and over again: we do not condone the use of torture to extract information from terrorists."

But he said it was "human nature" that torture might be employed in certain exceptional cases when time was very limited.

In the event of something like a nuclear bomb threat "you would try to exhaust every means you could to extract the information to save hundreds and thousands of people", he said.

'When not if'

But he admitted there was "a real question" whether using torture on terrorists would actually gain the information required "given the nature of the enemy".

He said the US did not have the luxury of knowing where and when a terrorist attack might happen.
"I don't think it is 'if'. I think it's a matter of 'when'. We operate that way," he said.

"On a day-to-day basis, not just the United States but many allies around the world, do whatever we can to share information about terrorists, share information about the kind of attacks."

Thursday's HRW report called for the Bush administration to set up a fully independent commission to investigate allegations of torture during interrogations at Abu Ghraib.

It said abuses committed by the US had significantly weakened the world's ability to protect human rights because it had undermined international laws.

Mr Ridge argued the HRW report reflected a "foreign perception" that the US was using different methods to those employed before the 11 September 2001 attacks.

Tom Ridge was speaking on BBC News 24's HARDtalk, to be broadcast on Friday, 14 January at 1930 GMT on BBC World and 2330 GMT on BBC News 24.
Click to expand...



[/QUOTE] BBC
 
I'm sorry. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should torture be used. Not even a nuclear threat. We've already been threatened with nuclear attacks by Al Qaeda, does this mean it's time to start the torture tactics? Give'em an inch and they'll take a mile.
 
I agree. Torture is a bad idea. Once we allow the torture of foreign prisoners, what's to stop them from torturing us? Traffic stop? Thumb screws. Theft? The rack...
 
I sometimes seriously wonder why we keep sticking to Marquis of Queensbury rules when the enemy has none. Its... frustrating being upon the noble path.
 
HeXp£Øi± said:
I'm sorry. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should torture be used.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Sometimes an answer is needed under any circumstances. Nuclear annihilation is not an option when it can be stopped.
 
unclehobart said:
I sometimes seriously wonder why we keep sticking to Marquis of Queensbury rules when the enemy has none. Its... frustrating being upon the noble path.
Click to expand...

It is frustrating. The question is do you trust our representatives not to abuse this power and if not will it be worth the consequences?

Gonz said:
Nuclear annihilation is not an option when it can be stopped.
Click to expand...

I will ask the same question of you Gonzo, Do you trust our representatives not to abuse this power? If you do, should we start torture practices now since we have already been threatened?

Torture is evil period. I assure you that once implemented it will take us down a path that we will regret.

On top of that torture has already proven no more effective than other methods.
 
The only thing more evil than torture is the death of hundreds or thousands (or more).

Scenario:

Y9ou just picked up a wiretap saying a building in the Wilshire district of Los Angeles has a dirty bomb set to go off at 5:10PM, maximizing it's human contact. The bomb is 5000lbs of high explosive, maximizing it's physical damage.

By chance, you have the number 2 guy of the group associated with this device in custody...he was picked up yesterday, in the Wilshire district. It's 3:30pm.

What do you do?

yes, I trust some of our leaders to do the job most of us aren't willing to do. there will be reprecussions for action. that is part of leadreship.
 
pop quiz, shoot the hostage in the leg to take them out of the equation.
 
Scenerios are hypothetical and it's impossible to write legislation that can be a useful guideline or even respected under such circumstances.


Do the needs of the many outway the needs of the few? Yes but if you hand me a gun and tell me that if i don't kill one person you're going to kill ten i'm still not going to kill that one person. Even if torture did help us(which it won't) it's still not a good enough reason to repond with such action. That kind of brutality will spread like wildfire.

I simply don't have the faith in our leaders that you apparently do. Not democrat, not republican, not anyone.
 
Pretty sure that psychological torture is permitted even if it transends the boundries of all that is horror and suffrage...
 
HeXp£Øi± said:
Scenerios are hypothetical and it's impossible to write legislation that can be a useful guideline or even respected under such circumstances.
Click to expand...


Which is precisely why you don't rule out certain tactics.
 
Abu Ghraib...

make everybody working there scared of their own shadows & too nervous to do their job properly & look what happens.

Hunt on for 28 missing detainees



BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi police searched Friday for 28 prisoners from Abu Ghraib who escaped from their custody while being transported to another facility in Baghdad, police and U.S. military spokesmen said.

Two police officers may have been involved in Thursday night's escape, Iraqi officials said.

The detainees were aboard a bus from the prison to another Iraqi correctional facility, said Lt. Col. Barry Johnson.

Iraqi police said several detainees had their hands bound with rope.

The inmates loosened the rope and managed to overpower the police and guards. One took an AK-47 assault rifle from a police officer and shot the officer, critically wounding him, police said. Four guards and the bus driver were severely beaten, police said.

Handcuffs and rope were found scattered in the street afterward.

The 38 detainees on the bus initially escaped, but Iraqi police said they captured 10 of them shortly afterward.

A source with the Iraqi Interior Ministry said authorities were investigating the trip because it was odd for prisoners to be moved at night with little security.

Officials said they are questioning the detainees who were recaptured.

Iraqi authorities have set up checkpoints in the western Baghdad neighborhood where the escape occurred, the Interior Ministry source said.

Of the 28 escapees, two are believed to be Egyptians. The detainees are accused of committing crimes against Iraqis, ranging from murder to theft.
Click to expand...
 
No. That leaves the door open to abuse. That's why you do close the door on certain tactics and should the occasion arise then you seek the power fior such action.
 
When there is abuse, try & convict the abuser. Guns don't kill people....
 
I think that it can be abused but it maybe the only way to get information. However I see more than one downside. If under the right conditions most people if not all would snap or if they didnt they would more than likely die. But they do it to us anyway. I thnk that as a means of information it can work.
 
http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2004/Jun/02-661834.html
It is critical to realize that the Red Cross and the Geneva Conventions do not endanger American soldiers, they protect them. Our soldiers enter battle with the knowledge that should they be taken prisoner, there are laws intended to protect them and impartial international observers to inquire after them.
Click to expand...




The United States Army agrees. The Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation states:



Use of torture and other illegal methods is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. Revelation of use of torture by U.S. personnel will bring discredit upon the U.S. and its armed forces while undermining domestic and international support for the war effort. It may also place U.S. and allied personnel in enemy hands at a greater risk of abuse by their captors.



In other words, weakening the rules against torture makes us less secure, not more. Torture produces unreliable information, makes it more difficult to win wars, and places our troops at risk.
Click to expand...

http://talkleft.com/Gonzaleshearingstatementfinal.htm
 
Use of torture and other illegal methods is a poor technique that yields unreliable results
Click to expand...

eh, I think torture is underrated. :D

I say apply the GC to "Armies" and "Nations" that apply them to us.
To all the other battles, and insurgents..."All is fair in love and war".

I just don't understand....somebody cuts off someones head, and people
are worried about civil rights. :confused:
Why give the enemy that edge?
I say if the want to go that way, so will we.
I think it would mean lesser casualties on our side.
 
catocom said:
eh, I think torture is underrated. :D

I say apply the GC to "Armies" and "Nations" that apply them to us.
To all the other battles, and insurgents..."All is fair in love and war".

I just don't understand....somebody cuts off someones head, and people
are worried about civil rights. :confused:
Why give the enemy that edge?
I say if the want to go that way, so will we.
I think it would mean lesser casualties on our side.
Click to expand...


How about rape then? Rape is torture should we be allowed to rape both men and women? After all rape is really no worse than applying a hot iron to the genitals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top