Torture or not

Because of Trump’s recent comment about bringing back water boarding and things even worse, the conversation around torture has been revived. Many who want to be politically correct say things like, it is not the American way. Some years ago I wrote up a scenario to illustrate that things like torture are not as simple as them seem and here is a reprint. I offer this bit of history to set the stage for the subject of torture as seen through the eyes of people in the west and in particular the people of the United States. To illustrate my point, I want you to assume that you are the President of the United States and a message has just be posted on an Islamic Internet site saying that 12 nuclear bombs have been planted in 12 major cities throughout the US and one will be exploded the first Friday of each month for the next 12 months. The purpose is to bring the US economy to its knees, which will result in a worldwide depression and thus give these groups the opening they need to take over. Whether this is logical thinking is not the point because it is what they believe. Many of these terrorist feel in their hearts that they are doing the work of God so they are highly motivated but the leadership behind these zealots has ulterior motives. The CIA comes to you and says they have captured a man whom they believe knows the locations of these bombs and they want permission to use any means to convince him to divulge this info. To make this more to the point they are not interested in something like water boarding, which will leave him physically unharmed but they want permission to use means that will result in death. They present you will four scenarios. First he is tortured and killed and they find the bombs and disable them. Second he is tortured and killed and there are no bombs. Third he is not tortured and there are no bombs and forth he is not tortured and the first bomb goes off in downtown Chicago. Make your choice and then redo the experiment but this time you know for sure which of the above four options is for real. Has your choice changed? If you chose not to torture and the bomb went off and next week they bring you another terrorist and you are faced with the same conditions, do you change your mind? Examine each of these options and see if your ideas about torture change with conditions. Now look at the situation through the eyes of the public. How do they view you and your presidency if you chose not to act and the bomb exploded and how do they view your actions if you chose to act and there was no bomb. Are you a hero or a goat in their eyes depending on the outcome? Can a person make a blanket statement that torture is wrong and we will not do it? If you chose not to torture and all 12 bombs exploded could you sit in your office and say that you protected the constitution and that is the most important thing or would you say it doesn’t make sense to save the constitution and lose the country. Do you torture or not? I saw a program where this scenario was presented to a group of experts and their conclusion was that the President should allow torture to find the bombs and then he should be tried by the Supreme Court as a criminal. These are the experts! Dah!!