Torture & Ethics

            One of the main ethical dilemmas that are involved in the film Zero Dark Thirty is the subject of torture. Whether or not severe forms of torture in order to get useful information is necessary is a controversial topic that is represented in this film. For example there are several scenes where interrogator Dan tortures Ammar who he expects to know information about the Saudi Group and Bin Laden who are responsible for 9/11. The torture scenes however are borderline humiliating and could even leave the audience thinking they are immoral and hard to watch even though it is for an overall good cause. Dan is shown stripping Ammar in front of his female colleague Maya, meanwhile depriving him of both sleep and food until he agrees to give them information. Dan even uses forms of torture such as drowning on Ammar as he orders him to be held down on the floor as excessive amounts of water are poured on his face. Ammar is also shown constantly having his wrists tied to the top of the ceiling in order to be restrained as well as being put into a cramped box and being made to crawl on the floor with a leash around his neck, as Dan proceeds to walk him like a dog when Ammar does not cooperate. The part where Ammar is stripped in front of Maya gives the audience an opinion about these interrogating practices since her reaction is one of guilt and embarrassment for Ammar since she immediately looks away and down often. The concept of torture is a hard subject since the scenes in the film are humiliating and not exactly moral or ethical. One could argue however that the humiliation, starvation, pain, and psychological pain are necessary in order to get information from someone who could be useful in turning terrorists in. The dilemma here is that torture can be necessary to restore justice meanwhile dehumanizing someone else.