Talk:Ticking time bomb scenario

Human rights Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

This article is obviously biased.216.106.103.204 (talk) 19:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you have to get rid of the siting of philip watts. he makes a variety of unfounded claims and quotes taken out of context with the goal of promoting a certain point of view. citing that article as credible is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.103.179.203 (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2007

Anyone can edit, just take it out if you don't think it should be included. It certainly does contain a point of view: "We must act now because the future is in the balance. The world cannot wait. While Bush gives his State of the Union on January 31st, I’ll find myself along with many thousands across the country declaring 'Bush Step Down And take your program with you.'" The way to obtain a balanced point of view, however is not to remove all points of view, but to balance them. Right now about 75% of Americans agree with Mr. Watts. 199.125.109.122 14:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Counter arguments

I think the real cases where torture was used under the ticking time bomb dilemma, and where it averted calamity, should be included in this article. I'm talking about the infamous tale of Guy Fawkes, who was tortured until he confessed his plot to blow up Parliament, and the case of Abdul Hakim Murad. Murad was tortured by US forces until he revealed his plans to attack the CIA. Both of these cases show that the time bomb argument has validity, and should be included in the article to provide balance to the currently rather one-sided analysis. Although I'm not quite the man to write, I feel it should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Failspy (talk • contribs) 07:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Gunpowder Plot wasn't a ticking time bomb scenario. Fawkes was caught in the act of trying to blow up Parliament, and the information he subsequently provided under torture was useless. -Father Inire (talk) 09:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay, thanks for the correction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.185.98 (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the full details of the Murad case, but from what I understand, when he was originally arrested they found ample evidence and details of the plot among his belongings, including written plans and bomb-making equipment. This was prior to his torture. 203.217.150.69 (talk) 06:12, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any presentation of a test case where torture was used effectively and beneficially would require, that the practitioners of said torture step forward and reveal themselves. these torturers would then be prosecuted. Thus the debate is overwhelmingly skewed in favour of torture's opponents. A discussion about the admissability and efficacy of torture would have to accept that firm evidence to its successful use, is thus preempted regardless of the true state of affairs. Then again, the absence of such evidence is resultantly of no indicative value. It is arguable that the mere non-existence of major terrorist attacks against the United States since 9/11 attests to the successful employment of torture.

One example to the extremely successful, though by no means edifying, employment of torture is the Gestapo in occupied Kiev as described in A Community of Violence: The SiPo/SD and Its Role in the Nazi Terror System in Generalbezirk Kiew [1]. It illustrates that, backed by an overwhelming force and also coldly applying the most vicious interrogation techniques, even the most unpopular of regimes can almost competely eradicate the most determined irregular resistence. This somewhat emetic example is all the more potent given, that Nazi rule in Kiev relied on nothing but repression to establish itself, went out of its way to alienate the local popuation and that its enforcers' mind was a boiling cesspool of bias and miperceptions regarding their enemy. Soz101 (talk) 22:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking about torture used for absolute population control, whereas this article is talking about using torture to find truth which would otherwise be unknowable. I don't know much about the Nazi rule of Kiev, were there any examples of this "ticking time bomb" scenario where the Nazis were able to prevent specific resistance plots using details learned under interrogation? 203.217.150.69 (talk) 06:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, respectfully, the absence of terror attacks on US soil since 9/11 cannot be linked to the use of torture unless we have an example of a time when there was a plot and it was discovered in advance using torture and then foiled. Without such an example, it's reminiscent of the Simpsons episode when Lisa convinces Homer that her rock must keep tigers away, since there are no tigers around. 203.217.150.69 (talk) 06:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, but according to a sourced quote at http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/or_20090425_8738.php: "After being subjected to waterboarding and other brutal methods in 2002, Abu Zubaydah explained that he and his "brothers" were permitted by Allah to yield when interrogators pushed them to the limit of their endurance. At that point, he provided information that helped the CIA capture Ramzi Binalshibh. The two captives then gave up details that led to the capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM, in official shorthand), whom Zubaydah had identified as the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

This does appear to be a verifiable case when coercive methods 9some consider torture) were directly and proximately responsible for the obtaining of new and useful intelligence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.90.150.2 (talk) 18:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still not the ticking bomb scenario though as the information did not prevent any attacks and the two subjects could have eventually been caught using other means anyway.Wayne (talk) 04:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Gestapo in occupied Kiev: Gestapo torture was not employed for the purpose of what another editor termed, absolute population control. When encountering individuals whose mere existence was believed inimical to German rule, the gestapo, and other arms of the German occupation authorities, summarily murdered them. Thus for instance, Jews in hiding who had been captured, were very rarely interrogated under torture. The gestapo was merely interested in discovering these Jews' names and similar details, before murdering them. The Gestapo employed torture when questioning active resisters and others who were strongly motivated not to divulge the information in their possession. The torture of Jews and other detainees for non-interrogatory purposes, though common, is of course a separate matter. I do not know and the article I cited does not specify weather their were any last minute discoveries of violent plots. The Gestapo in Kiev does however prove, that torture can be crucially effective in the suppression of underground resistance. The hated German rule could not have maintained itself without this success. At least not in the major cities. This success, hateful in every sense as it was, points in my opinion to the far greater successes that an even remotely well-intentioned occupation regime, aided by a marginally unbiased security police, can accomplish in suppressing irregular resistance if they employ a regulated form of interrogation under torture, when confronted with irregular resistance. Soz101 (talk) 00:30, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

better solution? up for debate

Why not allow torture, but only if the torturer(s) are perfectly documented. And if the torture fails in providing information, then the torturer(s) should be charged with murder (if fatal), or other suitable crimes. This way, no one would torture unless they were absolutely certain the suspect was a criminal, because they would jeopardize their own careers and lives by doing so...