War on Terror and Torture Policy: Administrative Evil

This chapter of Unmasking Administrative evil talks of the administrative evil in the 21st century. It specifically discusses torture and torture policy that went down at Abu Ghraib prisons and other parts of Cuba, Iraq, and Afghanistan to the detainees. Torture in this context is defined as any act of inflicting severe pain, suffering whether mental or physical to a person. When dealing with our enemies especially the terrorists we have to fight this enemy and be principled enough not to lose our principles and morals. It was noted that there were ghost detainees who complicated the reporting processes, violation of inspection and protocols with the International Red Cross. It is still a mystery that different reports did not cover the interrogation tactics used by the CIA. Something is still a mist about the influence of CIA tactics used by military personnel to interrogate different people. These interrogations even led to the death of an Iraqi general where it was indicated to be a toxic mix (Jason, 29).

If this sample essay on"War on Terror and Torture Policy: Administrative Evil" doesn’t help,
our writers will!

Trust an expert

These acts of torture to the prisoners are pure acts of evil as one deliberately afflicts pain and suffering to a human being. Guards, officers, and other interrogators were part of the administrative evil even if they did not participate in the torture. This is because they ignored what they saw and what happening around them. Health workers were also reported t take part in the abuse although they did not participate directly. This is because they saw injuries and scars on their bodies yet they failed to report to the authorities. We see an important aspect of administrative evil in the doctors where they tried to remain professional by writing about the injuries on the records, but they failed to raise an alarm to the authority to stop the torture. The evil could have been unmasked the doctors reported it sooner.

There were torture and abuse in interrogation. They try to justify the torture by saying that most detainees resisted the previously methods, and so they came up with more severe methods, and they used detainees to conduct these interrogations. Whereas some used torture, the FBI did not agree with this method as they said they did not work. The FBIs method of interrogation was faking a relationship with the detainee until they spoke out which worked out very well although it took a considerable amount of time. They claimed that brutalization only lost ones soul. The administration at that time wanted results immediately, so they resulted to torture to punish future terrorists. It was a poor choice on morals. The only time to use torture is in a scenario of ticking bomb in the case that only the detainee knows where the bomb is, and there are high chances that the bomb will detonate. In this case, torture can be justified to save a nation without following the procedure and policy.

Techniques used in Guantanamo spread to Iraq. These techniques included sleep deprivation, isolation, and removal of clothes as well as the use of stress positions. Lack of clearly written procedures led to no differentiation between what was allowed and what was prohibited. Could torture be justified as a consequence of the war on terror or 9/11 war? This was a shocking and traumatizing moment to the United States and the American history after they were attacked by Al-Qaeda killing thousands of innocent civilians. This attack led to Bush doctrine where he promised to eliminate all potential security threats to the United States. American forces attacked Afghanistan, destroying the Tailan Regime and captured people. It is this war that led to torture and abuse of the detainees in Abu-Ghraib.

After 9/11 War so many changes took place. There were deaths of twenty-six detainees under the U.S. custody that occurred. None of these cases of deaths were explained except for the few that had medical complications during the detention period. It was said that torture was a result of a few leaders failing o follow the written procedures, but nothing else was done. It is also said that the worst cases of torture happened at night shift. This is one of the instances that administrative torture is unmasked in the world. Although the Americans were hurt and betrayed, torture was not the best move to solve the problem. Furthermore, this method is prohibited and not according to the law.

Choices to redefine the rules of war set off a whole trail on torture. It was at this defining moment that torture and other abusive practices were approved which led towards moral inversion. Moral inversion allowed migration of practices and attitudes from Afghanistan to Guantanamo to Iraq. No direct order was given to torture anyone, but permission was there in the case of a dangerous terrorist who could bring harm to a nation and injure innocent civilians. Although torture and abuse of the detainees have reduced, there is still a path of moral inversion likely to be followed.

People argued that new warfare calls for new rules and they, therefore, justified the abuses and torture as they believed to be engaged in a new form of warfare. When Navy General learned that evil was considered okay, he wrote saying the relationship between man and government was being altered if at all cruelty was applied as a matter of policy. He stated that if exceptions were made to Americans or those considered enemies of the nation, then the whole constitution would crumble. There were also trials to determine whether one is guilty or not and what factors were involved in the case of abuse and torture. All the commanders stated that no orders were given to torture any one person. They, therefore, did this out of their own violation and collaborated with several military interrogators who were at the lower level. While no explicit orders were never given to torture any person, the lower level officers accused of torture said that they were just following orders. At the end of it all, the explanation given do not justify any reason for torture (Martin, 91).

Were torture and abuse cases of administrative evil or were they justifiable actions?

Are torture and abuse always wrong?

Did the United States reach a point of moral inversion and why?

At what point or situation are torture and abuse justifiable?

Works Cited

Adams, Guy B. Unmasking Administrative Evil. Thousand Oaks u.a: Sage, 1998. Print.

Saint-Martin, Denis. Public Ethics and Governance: Standards and Practices in Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam [u.a.: Elsevier JAI, 2006. Print.

Burke, Jason. The 9/11 Wars. London: Allen Lane, 2011. Print.