Is Torture Really Nessasary

Is Torture Really Necessary?

For many years torture has been seen as barbaric, however Michael Levin discusses the importance of using torture when necessary. "The Case for Torture", Michael Levin discusses the tactics and idea of torturing terrorists to either gain information from them. In this essay I will be discussing the importance of using torture when there is no other way to accomplish a said goal. The purpose of my paper is to summarize first what Levin is saying then decide is what he is saying would be effective in helping to maybe prevent terrorism or at least protect the country.

Levin starts out his essay stating his position from the start he says; "There are situations in which torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory." Levin argues that yes torture maybe completely inhumane but when it comes to saving many people it may be the only way we can come about doing just that. Levin believes that once you agree you can use torture you have taken the first step to understanding why torture can be justified in these extreme situations. He does not believe that torture can be used as any form of punishment. He is however purposing that torture can be used from prevent attacks such as his first example: If there was a bomb placed on Manhattan island on July 4th set to explode at noon, we have the guy but he refuses to tell us where the bomb is and how we can disarm it. So how do we extract the information from him, easy says Levin we use torture. We can do this because he as one person is putting many people in danger.

Levin says there is a huge line between terrorist and the people they put in danger. I think this is a point we can all agree on, the terrorist chooses to put these peoples life in danger, but the person whose life is in danger did not ask to be put in this situation. Levin says that once the terrorist decided to try to do such an awful thing he