I really enjoyed all of the conversations that we had about this piece. And I think it's difficult to choose a side, because I understand the reasons for both. But, I have to agree with the author. In rare cases torture is ok. In cases where one life is sacrificed for hundreds or thousands. I really like the point that the author makes about the terrorists having already volunteered to give their lives, whereas the hundreds of people that they put in danger did not. I thought it was clever of the author to make a point about Hitler, that everyone hates, and how we could have killed him and saved millions, but we didn't becasue it was morally wrong. I think this point would affect a lot of people. One person's life was saved, and millions were killed. I think that we should always do what is right for the majority.
A really freaky part to this article was that the author made the point back in 1982, that there would come a time very soon when terrorists would attack and we would have to make a choice about terror. And not too long after, 9/11 happened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Kendal-
I liked what you had to say in this blog about torturing terrorists. I agree with your views on the issue for the most part. It’s perfectly fine to torture a terrorist for information if he’s holding hundreds or thousands of people as hostages. But I also think it’s ok to torture people when just a few lives are at stake. If the risk were to lose only 2 or 3 people, saving them is more important that saving a terrorists’ life. As you mentioned in your blog terrorists chose to blow buildings up and kill people, the people that are going to die don’t chose to die that way. They are forced into that situation. He could have chosen to become something else, but instead he chose to live a life of evil. That is why it’s a good idea to torture terrorists.
And, yes, I also think it’s scary that the author wrote this back in 1982. He probably had no idea when he wrote it that it would become a hot topic to discuss and a very controversial issue after our recent terrorist attacks. It’s a scary coincidence that no one wanted to come true.
I agree with what you have to say about this piece. It is hard to choose a side because there are parts to each side that you agree with. Morally in our society, torture is wrong and we ingrain that into our heads and try not to think differently. But on the other side everyone hates terrorists because of the threat they pose to our country and our lives. We don't tend to think about our morals when it comes to the "bad people" in the world. If we hate them then that makes it ok to torture them? Or it only ok if they threaten other lives.
The point the author makes about terrorists already giving up their lives is interesting I think aswell, because when you think about that its true. But does that make it ok to torture them? Reading this article brings up so many more questions and I think that you answered some of them well in your response.
Kennel-
I really liked what you said about how terrorists volunteer to sacrifice their lives, but the thousands of people who could potentially die from the danger these terrorists are putting them in, did not. They're just innocent civilians trying to keep it cool. I also agree with what you said about how the author pulled on his readers emotional strings when he talked about Hitler. He knew that almost everyone has a common hate for Hitler and if we had killed him when the opportunity was there, instead of passing it up because it was morally wrong, we could have saved millions. For me, I knew that that point was one part of the authors argument that pursuaded my point of view since I definitely dislike Hitler, and it probably had an affect on others as well.
I also think it's scary how the author wrote this in 1982, and how we as Americans probably never thought we would have to address some of the issues that are made in this argument. But after 9/11 we basically had to choose where we stood in view about terror.
Post a Comment