The Torture Game

In the face of new evidence regarding the effectiveness of the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the CIA to obtain information regarding potential terrorist attacks, President Obama must be bold in his resentment and disgust. The GOP has—for the most part—purposefully painted the debate regarding these techniques to allow for only two mutually exclusive choices. Either, (1) the techniques did not work and therefore it makes sense for us to be against them (though it seems many will still support them), or (2), the techniques did work and we must therefore support them. If the evidence supports the effectiveness of these techniques, couldn’t President Obama and the Democrats still stand up against them? Couldn’t they say: “Sure, they seem to have worked, but nonetheless we find the whole thing appalling and certainly do not approve. Find better methods which do not contradict our principles as a country.” This produces a third possibility, the one least talked about: (3) The techniques did work, but we find them appalling and do not support the CIA’s use of them. Because of this, we want new methods which “save American lives” but do not make us—at least the more sensitive among us—uncomfortable. The GOP wants to say that if the methods were effective, the CIA was immediately right for using them. But this presupposes that enhanced interrogation techniques (i.e. simulated drowning, or worse) were the only methods available to the CIA, or even the best methods available. But how could they prove this? Did they exhaust all other methods? This issue has been incorrectly painted as a last resort scenario in order to justify the use of harsh techniques. This is a popular game among philosophers, who argue that perhaps it would be justified to torture if we could unlock necessary information to stop a ticking bomb that would kill many civilians. This hypothetical, though possibly useful in some rare scenario we have yet to experience, is really irrelevant to the current debate on torture. But many supporters of torture have improperly presented the debate in this manner, making everyone unnecessarily nervous so as to produce consent. For the most part, President Obama has acted as a President of values—values I sometimes disagree with—and I hope he can continue to stand tough against the GOP’s support of barbarism.