The rules of war; it sounds ridiculous when stated like that. Even though war is a brutal man vs. man, kill or be killed affair, there are rules to war. The 1949 Geneva conventions are the body of international law that deals with armed conflict. They were created for good reasons, but there are also flaws within them. The Geneva Conventions are exploited by terrorists and in some ways interfere with national security. These laws are getting our soldiers undeservedly prosecuted, even though our enemies don’t follow them at all. POW(Prisoner of War) treatment, war crimes, and the application of the laws towards terrorism are three protocols that need to be changed within the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions have strict rules regarding the treatment of POW’s. Under the Geneva Conventions POW’s cannot be harmed, tortured, and must live decently while detained (Stein). Compared to killing your enemy in combat and the bombing of known terrorist hideouts, torture is clearly the lesser moral crime (Stein). It is considered this because of the way torture makes us feel (Stein). You can imagine what torture would feel like; it’s a more personal approach (Stein). It’s not possible to visualize being caught in a bombing run (Stein). When in reality there are severed limbs, burning bodies, and pain just as agonizing as being tortured (Stein). The way wars are fought today in the modern era; where your enemies hide in heavily populated places collateral damage is unavoidable (Harris). Even how advanced our technology, when we drop bombs we drop them full knowing that a number of civilians will be harmed in horrible ways by them (Harris). So now we can ask ourselves if we fight war like this, where innocent civilians are being h... ... middle of paper ... ...Geneva Conventions, “Torture Bans,” and Murdered Soldiers: People on both sides of the aisle.” Accuracy in Media. 12 June 2007. Web. 13 February 2011. Harris, Sam. “In Defense of Torture” Huffington Post. 17 October 2005. Web. 24 February 2011. Luttrell, Marcus, and Patrick Robinson. Lone Survivor. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2007. Print. Smith, Jeffrey R. “War Crimes Act Changes Would Reduce Threat Of Prosecution” The Washington Post. 9 August 2006. Web. 23 February 2011. Stein, Joel. “Joel Stein: Why I’m in Favor of Torture” La Times. 10 October 2006. Web. 24 February 2011 Wilson, Tim. “Understanding the Geneva Conventions” Accuracy in Media. 21 September 2006. Web. 28 February 28 2011 Zielbauer, Paul von. “Charged with war crimes, U.S. troops get legal help from home” The New York Times. 22 July 2007. Web. 23 February 2011.
Several nations failed to abide by the Geneva Convention during World War II. As a result of this, the convention met for the fourth time to redefine and establish the rules to protect future veterans. (Simpkin) There were 130,000 POWs captured during World War II. Japan killed the most American POWs with a staggering rate at forty percent of 27,465. (Reynolds 10) It was these outrageous events of World War II that led to the Geneva Convention of 1949, which righted the wrongs of the previous conventions. (Geneva Conventions 864) So how bad were POWs treated? I am going to tell the accounts of one of the most severe acts against mankind that occurred during World War II.
Media concentration allows news reporters to fall victim to source bias, commercial impulse, and pack journalism. Together, all three of the aforementioned factors become known as horse race journalism, a cause for great concern in campaign media. In complying with horse race journalism, media outlets exclude third party candidates, reinforce the idea that politics is merely a game, and dismiss issues that directly affect voters and their day to day lives. Through horse race journalism, the media is mobilized in impeding an active form of the democratic debate in American politics. Even across the wide range of human values and beliefs, it is easy to see that campaign media coverage must be changed, if not for us, then for our children. It is imperative that we discern the flaws of the media and follow our civic duty to demand better media
Zissou, Rebecca. "'Freedom Fighters.'" New York Times Upfront. 22 Apr. 2013: eLibrary. Web.1 Oct. 2013.
Fox News is constantly being bombarded with accusations of media bias, furthermore, a number of different instances of have occurred which question the validity of Fox News (Groeling). These instances occur throughout normal news broadcasts. Some of the more recent, and grossly biased broadcasts, were from the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. Historically the Fox News Channel is known to lean heavily to the right, or on the republican spectrum. President Barrack Obama’s political party is widely known to the public as being democratic. Statistically, to this day according to studies over 17 million households receive some form of the Fox News Channel (Auletta). The Fox News Channel is published through a number of different channels to its viewers. These channels include: Television, radio, newspaper, internet and more increasingly electro...
But who actually are the prisoners of war? The prisoners of war are the people who no longer take part in hostilities, this can be soldier, shipwrecked people but also sick and wounded civilians. There have been four Geneva conventions over time and the first dealt with the treatment of wounded and sick armed forces in the field this convention was signed in 1864, the second convention helped wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed forces at sea this was signed in 1906, the third convention dealt with the treatment of prisoners of war during conflicts which...
In order for a military to execute its function, every platform of the chain of command must expect and demand obedience to commands (Montrose, 2013), because if this does not happen many lives can be at stake. A simply failure to comply with the orders given can not only jeopardize the lives of the soldiers, it can compromise the safety of all military personnel involved, even in the matter of national security. Utilitarianism has a core theory that some actions may be considered right or wrong relying on the effects of the outcomes. This theory is mostly what could be applied this situation of the detainees in the military prisons. During this time, national security was weak, the country was being attacked and threatened, and thousands of innocent civilians lost their lives. The military could was only looking out for the interest of the country and many interrogation techniques were used to get information that could lead the capture of Al-Qaeda leaders. Soldiers are sent to warzones without the ability to deny their own obligation to war, just because they believe it to be morally wrong. They are sent and receive orders under the assumption the government has all the information needed to make the best decision for the country. According to the periodical, Unjust War and a Soldier’s Moral Dilemma, individual soldiers who have
Kelley, Matt. “U.S. Urgently Searching for POWs in Iraq” Associated Press. 11 April 2003. 17 Apr. 2005 <http://www.drumbeat.mlaterz.net/>
Wingfield, David R. "Why International Law Supports the Invasion of Iraq: A Short History on UN
The issue of torture is nothing new. It was done in the past and it’s done now in the 21st century. Without saying one side is right and the other side is wrong, let us discuss the part that we agree on and find common ground. We as Americans want to protect Americans from harms. So how do we prevent that from happening without torturing? It is impossible to get answer without some sort of questioning and intimidation techniques, since we know captured prisoners during war are not easily going to give up information. We know the enemy we face doesn’t follow the Geneva Convention or any law that pertains to war, so does that mean we shouldn’t also follow the Geneva Convention also, which prohibits torture? Of course not, because we want to be example for the world. Republicans argue that we have to do whatever is necessary to keep Americans safe, and Democrats argue it goes against our values and makes us look bad. We as Americans, as leader of the free world we
In this case of the use of torture in the interrogation of terrorists by the United States, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that the sacrifice of one person 's well-being to obtain information that could be used to save more than one life would be justifiable, but what happens when you complicate this issue? For example, the use of torture can cause strain on foreign alliances as well as further instigate the organization that the person being tortured belongs to. This can lead to a stronger terrorist organization that is more unified. As a result of this effect, we can put more lives in harm’s way. The information could also allow the United States to locate the terrorist organization and eliminate its members while expecting our own casualties. The utilitarian approach would deem torture as ethical if the total amount of casualties, regardless if they are from the U.S, the terrorist organization, or uninvolved third parties, is less than would be without the torture. Unfortunately, there is often not enough information at the time of interrogation to determine if the utilitarian approach is ethically
Whether it’s to stop an imminent threat or as a form of response to fear and discrimination, it is common for states to turn towards torture as a mean of attaining information from someone. Torture has been used since the beginning of states and it is still used in some today. The Romans used torture on its citizens who were suspected of crimes, especially violent crimes. The world used torture as a means of acquiring a confession. The Russian Tsars would use torture in order to extract confessions. Ivan the terrible would torture his subjects for amusement, and Peter the great became paranoid that his own son was planning treason and had him tortured and executed. The Nazis tortured Jews in concentration camps and even tortured and killed
Torture is the act of inflicting severe physical or psychological pain, and/or injury to a person (or animal) usually to one who is physically restrained and is unable to defend against what is being done to them. It has ancient origins and still continues today. The torture debate is a controversial subject to modern society. Because it is such a complex subject, many debatable issues come from it. For example, many have debated whether torture is effective in obtaining the truth, affects the torturers, threatens the international standing of the United States, or undermines justice. Others include what qualifies as torture, or whether or not the United States should set an example by not torturing. The two opposing claims to this topic would be: (a) that torture should always be illegal because it is immoral and cruel and goes against the international treaties signed by the U.S. and torture and inhuman treatment, and (b) yes, torture is acceptable when needed. Why not do to terrorists what they are so good at doing to so many others?
Levin wants to change the negative views that society placed on torture so that, under extreme circumstances torture would be acceptable. He begins his essay with a brief description of why society views the topic of torture as a negative thing. He disagrees with those views, and presents three different cases in which he thinks torture must be carried out with provides few reasons to support his claim. He uses hypothetical cases that are very extreme to situations that we experience in our daily lives. From the start, Levin makes it perfectly clear to the reader that he accepts torture as a punishment. He tries to distinguish the difference between terrorists, and victims in order stop the talk of terrorist “right,” (648). Levin also explains that terrorists commit their crimes for publicity, and for that reason they should be identified and be tortured. He ends his essay by saying that torture is not threat to Western democracy but rather the opposite (Levin
Around the world and around the clock, human rights violations seem to never cease. In particular, torture violations are still rampant all over the world. One regime, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, establishes a strong elaboration of norms against torture. Despite its efforts, many countries still outright reject its policies against torture while other countries openly accept them, but surreptitiously still violate them. The US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia all have failed to end torture despite accepting the provisions of the Convention.
As Americans we take pride in our liberating government. But, it is essential to ask how much we, the general public, know about our democracy. Because of the representative structure of our government, it is in our best interest to remain as knowledgeable as possible about political affairs so that we can play an active role in our democracy by voting for candidates and issues. The media, which includes print, television, and the internet, is our primary link to political events and issues. (For the purposes of this essay only print and television will be considered.) Therefore, in order to assess the success of our democracy it is necessary to assess the soundness of our media. We are lucky enough to have a media, in theory, free from government influences because of our rights to freedom of press and freedom of speech, but we are still subject to the media’s interpretation and presentation of politics, as is the danger when depending on any source for information. So, we must address how the media informs us; how successful it is at doing so; and how we should respond to it.