May 1 will remain an important day in America’s history, and one the country will not soon forget. It was on this day that Osama Bin Laden was pursued and killed, allowing many Americans some closure following the horrendous attacks on our country on Sept. 11, 2001. Though many are simply satisfied with this fact, I became curious as the details of the situation were released.
When I first encountered the word “water boarding,” it didn’t appear very menacing to me. In fact, I remember it specifically being explained to me as simply dripping water on someone’s face. Thus, when the argument arose as to whether water boarding was considered actual torture and whether it was morally justifiable for investigators to employ these techniques on terrorists for vital information, I found it difficult to argue against it.
However, a few weeks ago I was exposed to a YouTube video of a conservative television talk show host being water boarded. Before experiencing it, he, like myself, justified the act of water boarding by claiming it was an imposing and very minimal discomfort on others to receive information that could save millions, such as the location of Osama Bin Laden; however, after subjection  a mere seven seconds of being water boarded, he let his viewers know over a live radio cast that water boarding was indeed torture. The water boarding he experienced was mild in comparison to that performed in interrogation settings, and, to me, this subtle form of it appeared torture enough. During the procedure, the person being interrogated is strapped to what appears to be planks of wood, on an inclined angle with his or her head closest to the floor. Once secured, a cloth is placed over his or her face and water is slowly poured in increments up the nose to simulate drowning. These increments can reach up to two minutes in length, which is more than enough to justify torture in my book.
In fact, according to Part 1, Article 1 of the United States Reservations of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, torture is, “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession.” Despite the fact water boarding perfectly fits the definition of torture, many Americans still attempt to justify it.
They claim vital information is obtained from said torture, but, the man who eventually would reveal information leading the U.S. government to Bin Laden gave the information under normal interrogation procedures.
Even more interesting is the fact that this man, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was water boarded at least 183 times since he was captured by the U.S. government in 2003 and never offered any information whatsoever when undergoing this torture. It wasn’t until years later that he revealed what information he knew under non-threatening interrogation procedures by professionals.
Furthermore, research shows methods such as water boarding or other coercive techniques are not as effective as simple, human persuasive techniques at producing information in these situations. Thus, the only argument officials have for using water boarding appears to be completely invalid.
Even if there were no moral issues with torture in general, why would the U.S. continue to employ an interrogation technique that has proven unfruitful in comparison to less violent techniques?