Brett Arter English 102

What makes a nation powerful? Is it its ability to sway other nations with words, and peaceful treaties? Is it the size and strength of its army, navy and air force? I believe that it is not these things that make a nation powerful, for as it is said, Knowledge is power. The nation with knowledge, intelligence and information is the nation with the most power, and the nation that is most efficient in attaining this information, will be the one that is considered powerful. The most significant portion of this knowledge is attained through the intelligence-gathering community, and is shared between the various intelligence-gathering agencies around the globe. However, some of this knowledge is attained through other means, certain necessary evils that many believe to be harsh and brutal. These methods are of course torture, the act of getting an individual to tell you what you want to know, or do what you ask of them by applying external stimuli. This stimulus most often comes in the form of bringing physical harm to the subject being questioned, although the international community by the Geneva Conventions has banned the age-old methods of torture. In later years methods of coercion have been refined to keep from being considered torture by legal terms. The most known of these is water boarding, and this has become a topic of heated debate in the international community, as well as within our own nation amongst the people. Is it torture? Do the people that we use this coercive technique on have the same right to protection against torture that the Geneva Conventions are meant to give? Do the men that we execute this technique on have any rights that would protect them from such treatment? Before we answer these questions I would like to discuss the history of water boarding. What history? one might ask. Well the idea behind water boarding is not new; the purpose of the technique is to mimic the sensation of drowning or suffocating in the subject. Today we do

Brett Arter English 102 this by restraining the subject, and wrapping a towel around their heads. After this, water is repeatedly poured over the subjects head. As stated above this mimics the sensation of drowning, a rather unpleasant experience, and it has been effective in making people talk [3]. The oldest known usage of similar techniques is dated back to the Spanish Inquisition, where conquistadors, in attempts to gain intelligence from prisoners would put a rag in the subjects mouth, and pour water on it. This was called Spanish water torture, and was similar to the Asiatic Chinese Water Torture [1]. Both the Japanese and German Gestapo in WWII used a similar method of the interrogation technique [2]. Water boarding was also used in the Algerian War, where a French journalist by the name of Henri Alleg was water boarded by French paratroopers in 1957 [4]. The process was also used in Vietnam, where it was ruled illegal to be performed by U.S. troops [5, 6]. In the past, water boarding was much more brutal and less controlled when compared to todays standards. Today, due largely to the media, the people are aware of what its government is doing to ensure our safety from those who would seek to do us harm. In the past, nations such as Japan, Vietnam and Russia, did things to P.O.W.s that would make us cringe in apprehension at how brutally they where interrogated. By comparison, water boarding would be considered merciful. But many experts consider water boarding torture. And admittedly, by definition, it is; it uses physical assertion on a subject to make them talk. And while not the torture techniques of the past, it can be harmful to the subject. If they get water in their lungs they can actually drown, they could have a heart attack due to the stress and fear of the situation. Keeping this in mind, we must also consider the people that our government is performing this act upon. We are not water boarding U.S. citizens; the men are not soldiers of an enemy nation. They are terrorists, self-proclaimed freedom fighters people that would kill

Brett Arter English 102 innocent men, women and children for the sake of their leaders. Fanatics that would end their lives because in a blast of mayhem and carnage, because they believe that they are making a point other than how far gone they truly have been lead. These men are also ones that would kill American civilians, and have, for their cause. As much as I am grateful for the Geneva Conventions being in place, as they protect our service men and women from torture at the hands of other nations, they are not meant to protect these men. Specifically, the Geneva Conventions protect members of a nations military organizations from being tortured by another nation who are captured and become prisoners of war. The Geneva Conventions do not protect enemy combatants that are not officially recognized by a nation that is a part of the Geneva Conventions. There for, as far as international law is considered, we can water board members of Alqeda, or any other terrorist organization. The majority of water boarding has happened at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, or Gitmo for short. This means that these men are being coerced within U.S. territory. Due to the location of Gitmo, critics of the water boarding process have said that they are entitled to the same privileges and rights that American citizens have against such treatment, as the Bill of Rights protects Americans from cruel and unusual punishment. The same critics believe that detainment at Gitmo is infringing on these mens rights. I point to the Bill of Rights itself, the document that these critics use to legitimize the rights they somehow believe that these men are entitled to. It is a point of fact that the Bill of Rights is meant to protect American citizens; the men we have detained at Gitmo, and the men we have put through water boarding are not American citizens, and therefore are not entitled to the same protection that we have under the Bill of Rights. Critics of water boarding believe that such treatment is unethical and that our government should follow the Golden Rule and that we should treat them as we would like our soldiers to

Brett Arter English 102 be treated. By comparison to how our captured service men and women have been treated at the hands of terrorists, we are being merciful. Al Qaeda has not only tortured our people, they have beaten them, and then beheaded them, not with a guillotine, or executioners axe, as was once done in the Middle Ages. No, they commence beheadings using combat knives, and slowly cut. Not even in death are they merciful or kind to the people they capture. I now ask this: if they would treat us in such a way, then why should we be worried about their well being when they lay in our hands. And even though they have no right to be treated with any form of respect, they are given food, water, and clothing. We treat our prisoners with at least a basic form of human decency, whereas they would treat our military men and women in some of the most horrific ways. Some of the critics of water boarding do not just oppose it because of its moral concerns, but because they feel that it is harmful to the subject. As I stated above, the methods of waterbased torture have changed over the centuries. Where the old Spanish way of doing it has been proven to be almost certainly lethal, the changes it has undergone have made it relatively safe. As it stands today, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a captured terrorist, and one of the major higherups in Al Qaeda has under gone 183 water boarding sessions, and is still very much alive, showing that the process is safe for the subject, albeit terrifying [7]. In many arguments, supporters of the water boarding technique ask a question. That question is If your mother, or wife, or some other loved one where to be captured by someone, and you had the one man that could tell you where they are in your custody, would you water board them? Would you do this to him to get that information? For me, the answer is yes. I would water board the man if it meant the safe return of my family or loved one. I would even take it further if need be. This is now the question that I put forward to you, the reader. Through

Brett Arter English 102 the course of this paper, I have made my arguments as to why I think that water boarding is an acceptable means to acquiring information that may save hundreds if not thousands of lives. But now it is time for you to make up your own mind, I have shown you one side of this controversy, and hope that you will agree with the on this matter.

Brett Arter English 102

[1] Schweiker, William (Fall 2008). "Torture and Religious Practice". Dialog 47 (3): 208216. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6385.2008.00395.x [2] Gorman, H. Candace (June 14, 2007). "Torture By Another Name". In These Times. http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3226/torture_by_another_name/. Retrieved April 18, 2009. [3] Safire, William. Safire's Political Dictionary, page 795 (Oxford University Press 2008): Waterboarding. A form of torture in which the captive is made to believe he is suffocating to death under water. [4] Leonard, Doyle (November 1, 2007). "Waterboarding is torture I did it myself, says US advisor". The Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/waterboarding-is-torture--i-did-it-myselfsays-us-advisor-398490.html. Retrieved April 19, 2009. [5] History of an Interrogation Technique: Water Boarding". World News with Charles Gibson (ABC News). November 12, 2005. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story? id=1356870. Retrieved April 19, 2009. [6] Pincus, Walter (October 5, 2006). "Waterboarding Historically Controversial". The Washington Post: p. A17. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html. Retrieved April 20, 2009. [7] Weaver, Matthew (April 20, 2009). "CIA waterboarded al-Qaida suspects 266 times". The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/20/waterboarding-alqaida-khalidsheikh-mohammed. Retrieved April 20, 2009.