Term Paper on "Ethics and the War on Terrorism"

Term Paper 9 pages (3193 words) Sources: 8

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Ethics and the War on Terrorism

In the wake of 911, the citizens of the United States faced an ethical challenge that was reminiscent of ones that it had faced in the past, but also unprecedented in American history. A faceless, amorphous enemy had attacked mainland America and the nation struggled to determine how to respond to that threat. There was no single country to bomb, no organized enemy to fight, as there had been in prior wars. Instead, the new enemy may have had strongholds in some countries, but the evidence strongly suggested that, in those countries like Afghanistan where terrorists had a large presence, many of the regular citizens were subjected to terror by those groups as well. Instead of killing enemy noncombatants, which had been an acceptable risk in prior wars, going into these countries to seek out terrorists would result in the deaths of non-enemy non-combatants. This changed the nature of the war and blurred the line between enemy and ally.

In addition, the nature of the attack was different than attacks in prior wars. First, the United States mainland had not been attacked in over a century, leading among many Americans to feel that the United States was impervious to attack. In addition, unlike Pearl Harbor, which was an attack on a military installation, the 9-11 attacks were focused aimed at civilians. This attack made all Americans feel vulnerable to attack, regardless of what they were doing. In fact, it seemed as if everyday Americans going about everyday activities were at the greatest danger, making it difficult, if not impossible for individuals to do anything to mitigate the personal threat posed to them.

Finally, unlike many past combatants, the terrorists were substantially different from Americans in a number of notable ways. First, they had a different religion, which was also Abrahamic, but the complicated and violent history between Christians and Muslims made it easy for predominantly Christian Americans to vilify an entire religion, which did not occur in the wake of the Christian-planned and committed Oklahoma City terrorist attack. Second, they generally spoke a different language, even if they spoke English as well. Third, they looked different; the terrorists all had brown skin, and though the men actually responsible for conducting the attack may have looked like the average American, those who planned the attack looked very different from the average American. These factors made it easy to identify the terrorists as other, which is the first step in dehumanizing them and preparing to treat them as something subhuman.

Together, these three elements contributed to a tremendous atmosphere in American society. Many Americans began to believe that an any-means-necessary approach was required to fight terrorism. Certainly this feeling was pervasive in the immediate aftermath of the 9-11 attack, when so many people were in fear of an imminent second attack. In that confusion, many people were more than willing to trade lofty concepts about civil rights and personal integrity for some assurance, however hollow, that their government would keep them safe from another attack. Since the attacks, many Americans have decried the loss of civil liberties that came with much of the post 9-11 anti-terrorist legislation, but the government has had a lingering powerful tool to combat protest; the claim that these laws have helped stifle additional terrorist attacks and that it would endanger national security to give the details of those thwarted attacks. Whether or not this is true is something about which Americans can only speculate, but it certainly seems as if it could be true, which lends some lingering support for the laws that had been created in reaction to 9-11.

Among the post 9-11 governmental policies that are the most troubling has been the three-part embrace of torture as an appropriate weapon in the administration's war on terror. First, the executive branch embraced terror as a legitimate means of interrogation, despite numerous international laws and social mores prohibiting terror. Second, the legislative branch has not reacted to these laws in any meaningful way, instead passing enabling legislation. Third, the judicial branch has yet to pass any decisions condemning torture and calling it unequivocally illegal.

There appear to be four arguments that are consistently used to defend the American use of torture against terrorists and suspected terrorists. The first of those arguments is that "international and constitutional constraints, including those against torture and those requiring due process, do not apply to prisoners that are held outside the territory of the United States" (Gathii, 2004). The second argument is that the prisoners, even those who may be United States citizens, are enemy combatants, and thus not subject to constitutional protections (Gathii, 2004). The third argument is that the 9-11 attacks were so extraordinary that the authority of the President's War Powers arising out of those attacks is beyond the scope of judicial review (Gathii, 2004). Finally, the fourth argument is that most of the prisoners are aliens, and as aliens, "they are not entitled to constitutional and international protections otherwise available to citizens and friendly aliens" (Gathii, 2004).

A central theme in these arguments is the idea that torture may be morally reprehensible, but that it is justifiable under some special circumstances. Those circumstances do not appear to be linked to a single particular characteristic or event, but to a combination of different events. Key in these events is the ability to identify the terrorist or potential terrorists as someone who is other and therefore outside of the normal protections that one would extend to an in-group member. Another key to the justifications is the idea that the risk posed by the terrorists is so extreme that stopping that risk justifies the use of extreme measures.

Torture as a Counterterrorist Strategy

Perhaps the most frequently used argument to support the use of torture against terrorists and suspected terrorists is the ticking-bomb argument. In the ticking-bomb argument, a terrorist is tortured in order to extract information about a primed bomb that is located in a civilian area (Bufacchi & Arrigo, 2006). Torturing the terrorist for information about the location of the bomb presents that possibility of thousands, if not millions, of saved lives, not to mention the prevention of mass destruction. This dramatic scenario is used by many to justify the idea that, at least under some circumstances, torture is permissible. Of course, if torture is permissible under any circumstances, it makes it much easier to justify torture under all circumstances.

The Bush Administration publicly announced its willingness to use torture under circumstances that seemed similar to the ticking-bomb scenario. Of course, it did not use the word torture, but instead used euphemisms like alternative methods and enhanced interrogation methods, but it did acknowledge the use of tactics labeled as torture by other agencies. In September of 2006, President Bush announced the transfer of 14 Al Qaeda captives from CIA prisons to Guantanamo Bay, with the implication that they were being transferred to that facility so that they could undergo enhanced interrogation (McCoy, 2006). In fact, he credited the use of alternative procedures on Abu Zubaydah to get the information required to capture Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a top Al Qaeda operative. The CIA then used alternative procedures to question Mohammed, which Bush credited with stopping a laundry list of terrorist activities, including: Al Qaeda's production of anthrax, an assault on the U.S. Marines in Djibouti with an explosive-laden water tanker, a car bomb attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, hijacked passenger planes being targeted at Heathrow, and attacks on U.S. buildings (McCoy, 2006).

However, the reality in that scenario is the same as the reality in most ticking-bomb scenarios; torture did not lead to the revelation of necessary information. In the wake of Bush's announcement, it was revealed that the pertinent information had been obtained prior to the use of enhanced interrogation methods (McCoy, 2006). Moreover, it was revealed that much of the information obtained as the result of torture was actually duplicate information that the government already possessed (McCoy, 2006). While the danger of an imminent threat that could only be averted through the use of torture was given as a reason to validate torture, that characterization simply did not hold up under scrutiny.

Moreover, the reality of a true ticking bomb scenario is so grossly improbable that it is almost impossible that it would ever occur. Four events have to occur in order to come close to the circumstances of the ticking bomb scenario, and the likelihood of each event is highly improbable. First, a law enforcement agency has to apprehend a terrorist sometimes between the setting of a bomb and that bomb's detonation (McCoy, 2006). Second, the law enforcement agencies have to have enough knowledge that they know the apprehended terrorist must have the knowledge necessary to lead them to the bomb or somehow provide a means to stop its explosion (McCoy, 2006). Third, while the law enforcement officials have enough information to know that this particular terrorist holds the… READ MORE

How to Reference "Ethics and the War on Terrorism" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

War in Afghanistan Research Paper

War in Afghanistan

Following the unprecedented 9 / 11 terrorist attacks on American soil, an atmosphere of fear and hysteria swept through the world. U.S. reprisal came in the form… read more

Research Paper 13 pages (3674 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Terrorism / Extremism / Radicalization

---

Terrorism What Is Involved in Terrorism Investigation? Essay

Terrorism

What is involved in terrorism investigation? Unlike many criminal investigations, investigating terrorism and terrorism issues are dependent on far more issues. First, the investigation may be national, international, or… read more

Essay 3 pages (1034 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Terrorism / Extremism / Radicalization

---

Just and Unjust USA War Against Afghanistan Term Paper

Terrorism

There are a number of ways to interpret terrorist attacks in the modern world. The Bush administration has chosen a particular perspective that is intended to justify the employment… read more

Term Paper 30 pages (9571 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Terrorism / Extremism / Radicalization

---

Global War on Terrorism Thesis

Global Terror War

Policy Advice for Confronting the Global Terrorism Threat

The threat of terrorism to national security is as high as it has ever been. The scale and sophistication… read more

Thesis 6 pages (1797 words) Sources: 8 Style: Harvard Topic: Terrorism / Extremism / Radicalization

---

War and Torture Term Paper

Torture and War

Drawing the line between what is torture and what is coercion, on one level, is an exercise in semantics. Mark Bowden, in his book, the Art of… read more

Term Paper 4 pages (1416 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Terrorism / Extremism / Radicalization

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>