You have to remember that we're not just randomly grabbing people off the street and torturing them to tell us where Bin Laden is. We're talking about captives who we typically have reconnaissance on, we know what questions they have answers to, and which they do not. Our interrogators understand how to fish out simple information, verify it's truthfulness, and move through a progression of questions that get us answers or partial answers. Even when interviewees are lying or giving bad information, they're telling us usable information in some form. Using the blanket statement that waterboarding gives no usable information is just a flat out lie. When a professional interrogator, reaches a point that they're confident waterboarding will coerce usable information, that is believed to be extremely important to the safety of the homeland, why tie their hands?
You can argue against torture on the principle of human decency. You cannot argue that you know how to interrogate people better than professionals.
What are we gonna do now? Taking off his turban, they said, is this man a Jew?
'Cause they're working for the clampdown
They put up a poster saying we earn more than you!
When we're working for the clampdown
We will teach our twisted speech To the young believers
We will train our blue-eyed men To be young believers
It induces powerful hallucinations, you suffer memory problems, you lose free will (which means you cannot control what and when you say)... You can say any random stuff while being interrogated, and the interrogators will never know if it even makes sense, let alone if it is true.
So no, it is useless for getting information. It might be useful for getting someone who resists for long to sign a document with confession, I guess - but that's about it.
Most CIA directors and spies agree that some forms of torture are a very useful tool, waterboarding included. If you get captured by the CIA for interrogation, you fucked up hardcore and are 99% guilty or guilty by association. Even tortured information is useful
Link to a source for this, because they last time the government and intelligence agencies looked into the usefulness of torture they found it didn't work well. At all.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-...210-story.html
Also, kudo's to the, "Well, if the CIA grabbed you, you must be guilty!" nonsense. Because clearly the CIA has never made any mistakes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...120301476.html
Nope, doesn't happen.
Last edited by Edge-; 2016-07-01 at 06:59 PM.
Not so much defending torture, but I think it depends on what one is trying to gain out of the process. I remember watching a Delta Force training video, and the early comments from the instructors talking about the initial weeding out process was "We don't need to get in people's faces and yell, we have better means to break you". I think if it's a case of "Give me the password" Torture has a better chance of working. Give me a list of names of other terrorists, you're just going to get a bunch of made up names.
If it's a well established fact that it doesn't work period, then why would anyone do it? This wouldn't be up for debate, because there would be no need in doing it, because everyone knows it doesn't work.
Last edited by Mad_Murdock; 2016-07-01 at 07:07 PM.
Unreal, I don't recall any presidential or PM candidate (in a western country atleast) who had more torture on the program in their campaign, the guy makes the different right wing parties in various European country seem somewhat sane.
People who claim torture does not work watch too many movies.
Once witnessed the interrogators break an iraqi with nothing more than an empty plastic water bottle.
They never touched him. The sound they made with it apparently was frightening to him.
Gave information that helped lead to the demise of a well known sniper in the area.
yeah. torture doesn't work.
There is no Bad RNG just Bad LTP