How to Make Terrorists Talk?

[Johnny W]

To say you are willing to disregard civilized law and sacrifice your morality, all for the sake of 'safety,' is to admit to those trying to defeat us that they have at least beaten you.

I think that 99.9% of the time, torture is useless. But this statement is pure hyperbole. If I waterboard some guy who was responsible for thousands of deaths in order to obtain information to save lives, I haven't lost or been defeated at anything. I bet at some point in time, Douglas Macarthur or Chester Nimitz had some Japanese fellow mistreated in order to obtain information or at very least knew about it, and it was kept quiet. And we still won World War II. In fact, despite our treatment of the Japanese americans in WWII, we still were the victors, both in the physical and moral sense.

Nor will our civilization will not collapse, or even be seriously damaged because we waterboarded 2 or 3 members of Al Qaeda. If it could be that easily damaged, then we would have not lasted as long as we have. That does not mean its right to do so (nor does it mean it is wrong) but those who say that if we do this, we lose are being silly.


If you want to say that by using torture, we are violating ethical codes, or hurting our standing in the world, that I can buy. But saying that we lose by waterboarding 2 or 3 members of Al Qaeda is an overused cliche.

[cmmcgo]

I think that 99.9% of the time, torture is useless. But this statement is pure hyperbole. If I waterboard some guy who was responsible for thousands of deaths in order to obtain information to save lives, I haven't lost or been defeated at anything. I bet at some point in time, Douglas Macarthur or Chester Nimitz had some Japanese fellow mistreated in order to obtain information or at very least knew about it, and it was kept quiet. And we still won World War II. In fact, despite our treatment of the Japanese americans in WWII, we still were the victors, both in the physical and moral sense.

Nor will our civilization will not collapse, or even be seriously damaged because we waterboarded 2 or 3 members of Al Qaeda. If it could be that easily damaged, then we would have not lasted as long as we have. That does not mean its right to do so (nor does it mean it is wrong) but those who say that if we do this, we lose are being silly.


If you want to say that by using torture, we are violating ethical codes, or hurting our standing in the world, that I can buy. But saying that we lose by waterboarding 2 or 3 members of Al Qaeda is an overused cliche.

Let me please counter your points one by one.

1. You have just proven my point. If torture is useless 99.9% of the time, there is no way to know before hand, at any given time, that you are dealing with the hypothetical 0.1% where it is useful. The logical conclusion to your argument then is that we must torture 100% of the time to ensure we get the info we need that 0.1% of the time. I think we can all agree that is lunacy.

2. You accuse me of using 'cliché's'. The hypocrisy would be laughable if this weren't such a serious topic. What of the 'ticking time bomb' cliché that you at least reference? This is a straw man's argument based on the fallacy that you would somehow know EVERY SINGLE PIECE of information you need EXCEPT the location of the bomb. Heck you even KNOW they guy you're torturing HAS that information. Oh, and btw, you somehow know that the information you are given by this hypothetical captive under duress is accurate and not a misdirection or false fact given in the attempt to make the torture stop!

3. Unless you know some fact unknown to the rest of us who are highly familiar with history, do not use dead men's name in vain! How dare you, sir! As easily as you claim these men did and would torture, I could claim that they were men of honor who would be appalled by the idea of torture. You do not know, and how dare you to speculate, what these men did or would do. I like to believe in the best of our grandparents generation....not the worst. If you have facts, provide them, if not, how dare you!!

4. I never said the terrorist beat all of US, I said they have beaten YOU! They have caused you to become so fearful and afraid that you are now willing to give up, so readily, the one thing that separates you from the rest of the animal kingdom. Once you sacrifice your moral beliefs, you are nothing more than a really intelligent animal running around on the planet. If our only purpose in life is survivalism, then one must ask....what then is the purpose of life?

5. YOUR opinions on this subject are IRRELEVANT!! Our communities values supersede your values on this subject! You "Have the right to swing your fist until such time as it comes in contact with someone else's face". Given that you are both symbolically (and perhaps literally) swinging fist into someone else's, face our society has the dominant position on this issue. Society and civilized people don't agree with you. You live in our society. Ergo, YOU are WRONG! If you want to live in a place where Torture is 'good to go' i can recommend a few places.....


To conclude this and put my thoughts on this matter all out in the open let me say this:

We are all going to die one day. All of us. You, me, members of our family...one day all of us will be dead...be it old age or a disaster. What makes our lives important is not how we die, but how we live....more specifically:

We live as individuals but achieve immortality through our beliefs as a society and community. What, essentially, you are proposing is to achieve (highly speculative) short term gains for significant long term losses. As we sacrifice our values as a society in the pursuit of safety we begin to become a society no longer worth saving. If survivalismis the end all and be all of our existence, then what in the world is the point of existing?

We must grow as a community and strive to become better than both ourselves and our past. You want to beat the terrorist? Here's is how:

For every building they blow we'll build two; for every life they take, we'll ensure there are 100,000 people living in happiness and prosperity; for every dollar they spend to destroy we will spend $100,000 to create. We will let them know that their savagery will not affect us, will not deter us, and will not cause us to sacrifice our core moral beliefs. We are men and women of Values, and they do not scare us. The worst they can do us is kill us....and since we all die one day, anyways, we refuse to let them change how we live.
I am NOT saying we will not defend ourselves!! I AM saying that while we defend ourselves we will do so in an and honorable and moral fashion and not resort to becoming that which we are fighting. Never forget one of my favorite sayings...."You dance with the devil, you don't change the devil....the devil changes you."
So to put all these words I've babbled with very simply:

Why not Torture? Because it is wrong, both spiritually and morally, and we are better than that.

[Merlin]

I put this in this thread as it is related.

Detainee’s testimony raises concern over interrogation techniques

16 June [Freep] WASHINGTON — Accused Sept. 11 organizer Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told U.S. military officials he gave false information to the CIA even after undergoing punishing bouts of interrogation, according to documents made public Monday, a claim likely to intensify the debate over the Bush administration’s use of harsh techniques to gain information from terrorism suspects.

Mohammed made the assertion during hearings held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where the militant leader was transferred in 2006 after being held at secret CIA sites since his capture in 2003.

“I make up stories,” Mohammed said, describing in broken English an interrogation likely administered by the CIA concerning the location of al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.

“Where is he? I don’t know. Then, he torture me,” Mohammed said. “Then I said, ‘Yes, he is in this area.’" ....

[tankie]

“Where is he? I don’t know. Then, he torture me,” Mohammed said. “Then I said, ‘Yes, he is in this area.

Oh well that should do it for me then ,yup he,s in this area so all interrogation stopped did it , did he say where exactly bin hiding was ? i sense a compensation claim coming .

[cmmcgo]

“Where is he? I don’t know. Then, he torture me,” Mohammed said. “Then I said, ‘Yes, he is in this area.

Oh well that should do it for me then ,yup he,s in this area so all interrogation stopped did it , did he say where exactly bin hiding was ? i sense a compensation claim coming .

I'm not quite sure you got the point.....

The degree to which people are willing to stick with irrational, illogical, and just plain incorrect ideas, in the face of overwhelming evidence supporting a contrarian point of view; all because they can't mentally deal with the concept that they migh actually be wrong about something--frightens me more than all the terrorist.

If you are in the army and still don't get why torture is wrong, I strongly suggest you stop watching fox news and re-look at the army values.

[tankie]

I'm not quite sure you got the point.....

The degree to which people are willing to stick with irrational, illogical, and just plain incorrect ideas, in the face of overwhelming evidence supporting a contrarian point of view; all because they can't mentally deal with the concept that they migh actually be wrong about something--frightens me more than all the terrorist.

If you are in the army and still don't get why torture is wrong, I strongly suggest you stop watching fox news and re-look at the army values.

Oh i got the point very well , i dont get fox news in the UK so another wrong assumption , and while your running around frightened , thank the powers that be for trying to make the world safer from these pieces of crap , and i think if you think i cant get round the idea that we/i /us/ can be wrong about something you just dont see the whole picture .And IMO you dont know whats at stake . ,I retired from the forces in 1982 so i strongly suggest you stop making assumptions .

PS can you let members know something about yourself ,,,,or would tah be a give away .

[Shiny Capstar]

Well, a lot of people when tortured are eventually going to say something, anything, to make it stop. They will say what they think the interrogators want to hear to try and end the pain/suffering, or just to provide some respite. They might not know a thing but they will make things up as for them it is the only way out.

[tankie]

Well, a lot of people when tortured are eventually going to say something, anything, to make it stop. They will say what they think the interrogators want to hear to try and end the pain/suffering, or just to provide some respite. They might not know a thing but they will make things up as for them it is the only way out.

Thats what i mean Capt , this whole thing stinks ,,its him saying he was tortured , but yes ,everyone will talk eventually , for him to say ,,ok he,s in this area ,,and the torture :AKA: interrogation just stopped ??

(and to carry on making up stories knowing he would be found out ,,, jeez hang on , i got it now , he,s a massochist )


at least thats what the link portrays as he doesnt elaborate further ,,,, B/S . he,s on the compo trail IMO.


Give him one night with a pair of C/Guards yomped in DMS and socks and untold stories will abound and be forthcoming ;)

[gunnut]

I'm not quite sure you got the point.....

The degree to which people are willing to stick with irrational, illogical, and just plain incorrect ideas, in the face of overwhelming evidence supporting a contrarian point of view; all because they can't mentally deal with the concept that they migh actually be wrong about something--frightens me more than all the terrorist.

If you are in the army and still don't get why torture is wrong, I strongly suggest you stop watching fox news and re-look at the army values.

I will not hesitate to sacrifice yours and your family's lives to uphold your moral values.

[Merlin]

Whether torture is wrong is an important and emotive issue. But over here it is a different issues.

The issue in my last post related to this thread is about getting hardened extremists to speak out on what they know.

When under torture they are forced to speak, but ended up lying, or telling what the interrogator want to know. When there is no good way to tell whether they are telling the truth. Then there is no purpose in admnistrating torture on these hardened extremists.

Under extreme torture condition, when they feel they are nearly dying, they just harden further. They are ready to die. They do not soften.

[gunnut]

Whether torture is wrong is an important and emotive issue. But over here it is a different issues.

The issue in my last post related to this thread is about getting hardened extremists to speak out on what they know.

When under torture they are forced to speak, but ended up lying, or telling what the interrogator want to know. When there is no good way to tell whether they are telling the truth. Then there is no purpose in admnistrating torture on these hardened extremists.

Under extreme torture condition, when they feel they are nearly dying, they just harden further. They are ready to die. They do not soften.

I'm not talking about torture. I'm talking about making them uncomfortable if they don't cooperate. Some people say sleep deprivation is torture. Some don't. I don't suggest we pull fingernails or a few hundred other brutal techniques that are outright torture and would accomplish very little.

[Shek]

Easy you have a source maybe they have a general idea but not every thing, do you risk a City? thousands of lives? what if the city you live in is at risk do you play nice then?

Torture has proven to be less effective than rapport building and/or ego challenging interrogation techniques. Why would you choose a less effective technique that causes you to waste assets going after false leads?

[Blue]

Buy them a restaurant in the bahamas!! Good gawd the cruelty!!! We are an EVIL people!!

[sumob]

There is another POV.

Supposing there was a role reversal, the CIA chap or the Army personnal is being interrogated by these Terrorists, then do you think there will be so much of a discussion about interrogation techniques.

[axeman]

There is another POV.

Supposing there was a role reversal, the CIA chap or the Army personnal is being interrogated by these Terrorists, then do you think there will be so much of a discussion about interrogation techniques.

So what you're saying is - the CIA chap is justified in torturing the 'might-be-terrorist' because he would recieve the same treatment if caught ?