In the next chapter titled Propagating Torture, the author wrote about how torture took place in the army. The author gave an example about an investigation of Colonel Robert B. Rheaut. The investigation involved him killing a suspected Vietcong spy named Tahi Khac Chuyeng. There was evidence found in Vietnam that Chuyeng was a double agent working for the enemy. Rheault found this out and used truth serum and lie detector tests for an interrogation which confirmed his treason. Then Chuyeng was shot and killed and his body was thrown into the sea. Then the U.S. commander in Vietnam ordered an investigation against Rheaut. Rheaut said that he had orders from the CIA to kill him. This is just one example of hundreds of similar executions that took place in South Vietnam. I don’t think that the CIA should have given orders to kill Chuyeng, but rather have him put in prison and interrogated and try to force information out of him. Another really intresting part of this chapter was a study done on people who have been tortured before. There were 200 victims examined and doctors found nearly 70 percent still had mental symptoms of the time they were tortured. “Even many many years after their torture, victims still had nightmares, depression, panic attacks, and low energy.” These things can stick with a person for their whole life if they do not get the right therapy. This idea that people can have effects stay with them for their whole life is a big argument in the issue on torture. Not only do they have physical and psychological effects when they are getting tortured, but they have side effects for their whole life.
I think it's interesting that in your two prior posts you seemed to be saying that torture, especially of the psychological rather than physical persuasion, should not be used. However, here in the case of Chuyeng you said that you think they should have "put [him] in prison and interrogated and try to force information out of him." I mean, forcing the information out of someone usually alludes to them being tortured. Also, you brought up that a lot of victims of torture suffered some mental reprecussions. If Cheyung was allowed to live and thrown into prison and tortured using these new techniques to "force" the information out of him that he could have suffered from theses mental issues too. Is it possible that it would be better to die rather than live out a life that keeps you trapped in fear and the trauma of the past?
ReplyDeleteWow, this book sounds really interesting. I’m choosing to comment on this post because we were just discussing the topic of deprivation torture. I learned a lot about how one’s mind can not only hallucinate but convince itself as well. These types of torture are the exact things used to coerce false confessions. I couldn’t agree more with you when you stated that you are against these methods. As a matter of fact I don’t think the word torture itself could have a positive connotation. Even terrorists who kill hundreds, although may not be sane, deserve fair and just treatment in prisons. In your post regarding the chapter, Propagating Torture, you describe the tortures that took place in the army and Vietnam. Although I had heard about these two subjects and even learned about them last year in American Studies, I am still immensely disgusted that U.S. troops and the CIA have murdered and tortured thousands of innocent civilians. The side effects of torture victims are not only mentally scaring but emotionally overwhelming. The terrible and inhumane treatments imposed on criminals and even innocent people is so immensely unjust and should be protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, Cheyung was a spy and therefore threatened the United States. Because he was a threat to our country, I think torturing him is justified. This is the only time I believe in torture and I think the U.S. army should be able to push Cheyung as far as they needed to get information out of him. I don't believe dying is better than living a life in fear and trauma from the past because even though torture comes with very strong consequences on the victim, they can be dealt with over periods of time. There is a section in the book that discusses how people can deal with the effects of torture. It is very hard to do, but yet possible and better than being dead in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteDoran: I agree with most of what your saying except for the part where you say that terrorists who kill thousands of people do not deserved to be tortured for information. If you read my later posts I disccuss what is called a "ticking time bomb" situation. Lets say a terrorist is captured and he holds information that can lead to a plot that can kill thousands of American citizens. Are you saying that he doesn't deserve to be tortured to get information out of him? With his information, his plot to kill could be stopped and interrogating him is the only way to break him. Therefore, that is pretty much the only time I believe in torturing a human being.