Debatepedia Compiles All Pros and Cons on Enhanced Interrogations

Debatepedia completed on April 29th, 2009 the world’s most comprehensive break-
down of all the pro and con arguments and quotations in the major public debate
surrounding enhanced interrogation techniques.

Washington, DC, May 01, 2009 -- Debatepedia, a wiki encyclopedia of pros and cons
and a project of the International Debate Education Association (IDEA), completed
the world’s most comprehensive article on the pros and cons of enhanced
interrogation techniques. The article includes nearly 50 pro and con arguments and
quotations from nearly one hundred different major sources in the debate. And yet,
in the true spirit of a wiki, the article remains unfinished, with the potential
to include and document even more of the arguments and quotations that have been
made in this major, global public debate. Nevertheless, the article is the most
comprehensive available, outlining the most important arguments made in the key
editorials, opinion pieces, speeches, statements, interviews, journals and books
surrounding the topic. And, it does so within Debatepedia’s famous and innovative
pro/con structure, which is a simple pro/con splitscreen divided up by sub-debate
questions and sections. In the case of enhanced interrogations, the larger
question is obviously whether the program was justified, while the sub-debates are
driven by smaller, more chewable questions (an approach that utilizes the Socratic
method of yes/no question asking). This ensures that arguments and counter-
arguments are seen sign-by side, maximizing the ability of citizens to “weigh”
them and deliberate. For this debate, these sub-debate questions and sections
include:

Are enhanced interrogation techniques a valuable way of obtaining intelligence,

fighting terrorism, and upholding national security? Are traditional techniques,
including approaches that attempt to win the trust of prisoners, more effective?
Does this matter, or should such considerations of efficacy be subordinate to
considerations of legality and morality? Do enhanced methods amount to torture
under domestic and international law? Do they inflict "severe pain and suffering",
and possibly long-term physical and emotional damage? Even if these methods are
not considered torture, are they "cruel, inhumane, and degrading", possibly making
them illegal under international and domestic law? Are all coercive interrogation
techniques morally abhorrent? Acknowledging that enhanced interrogations usually
take place in secrecy and in secret prisons, are these prisons morally abhorrent
and illegal? Do "enhanced interrogation methods" send the wrong message to the
world? Do they worsen terrorism by increasing anti-Americanism? What are the pros
and cons of each individual "enhanced technique"? What is the balance of pros and
cons? Are enhanced interrogation techniques justified?

As America moves forward in judging the Bush Administrations past use of these
techniques, whether to launch investigations and so-called "truth commissions",
and whether to prosecute those that ordered their implementation, it is as
important as ever to understand all the pros and cons involved in the debate.
Without such an understanding, sub-optimal decisions may be made in moving
America's interrogation programs forward. Debatepedia is proud to aid in this
process and to live up to its mission “to clarify public debates and improve
decision-making globally."

Related links:
Enhanced interrogations pro/con article:
http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Debate:_Enhanced_interrogation_techniques
Home page: http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Welcome_to_Debatepedia!
Media kit: http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Debatepedia:Media_Kit

Contact:
Brooks Lindsay
Founder
Debatepedia
3731 E Prospect
Seattle WA, 98112
206 406 7558
brooks@debatepedia.com
http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Welcome_to_Debatepedia