The use of torture has become a major issue of controversy as we enter an era of global war on terrorism. The debate over whether it has become morally permissible to torture terrorists is held by many as the legitimacy of such actions is questioned in a world where global terrorism is exceptional. Using the time bomb scenario, some argue that in particular circumstances there is a right to torture individuals implicated in acts of mass violence. Yet many still argue that there are a number of inconsistencies hidden in the time bomb scenario and that there are no circumstances in which torture could be morally permissible, regardless of the consequences. The time bomb scenario is simplistic. A bomb has been planted in a very populated city, we don't know where it was placed but we have the alleged terrorist in custody. Time is running out and we have no answers on the location. The time bomb scenario outlines that in this situation it would be justifiable to torture the suspect if it meant saving thousands of lives. (Buffachi, Arrigo, 2006) This scenario indicates various reasons to legitimize torture and provides desirable and even heroic qualities in committing the act. While it initially appears as a persuasive argument in favor of the heroic actions of thousands of people over the good of just one, it raises several questions about whether or not torture is still morally permissible, regardless of what the scenario entails. Although the morality of the act in this scenario is full of inconsistencies and fictitious results, it has become the main support in arguments justifying the use of torture in the 21st century war on terrorism. Some would say that...... paper... allowing torture to take place only in these exceptions creates reasons to reject the scenario based on the broader consequences of allowing torture to become routine. Many arguments as to why the scenario does not give anyone the right to torture a suspect also stem from the assumption that the suspect is actually guilty of the crime and will actually provide the necessary information. Bufacchi and Arrigo (2006) agree with this assumption but also argue that since no one else has yet to propose a faster solution to the time bomb scenario without torture, this is the winning idea because it is the best they have. (p. 367) However, this cannot justify the use of torture on an individual because not only is it a direct violation of their fundamental rights as a human being, but there are too many factors to consider in the scenario to completely justify the use of torture. torture.