3 ms·

If it takes you more than 83 separate instances of waterboarding somebody to decide that they don't have useful information to share with you, then waterboardin

If it takes you more than 83 separate instances of waterboarding somebody to decide that they don't have useful information to share with you, then waterboarding is not an efficient way to get reliable information. If waterboarding is not an efficient way to get reliable information, then I'd be very curious to hear about what definition of "work" you're using where waterboarding might satisfy, but fail in this particular instance.

overcast 10y ago
For all the times it didn't work, how many times did it work for others? One person, with no information, doesn't mean anything.
- chishaku 10y ago
  "Here are eight cases cited in the report where the C.I.A. made the case that its tactics thwarted plots and led to the capture of terrorists, and how the committee's report undercut those accounts." http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-torture-work-the-cias-claims-and-what-the-committee-found.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-tor... Full report: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/senate-intelligence-committee-study-on-cia-detention-and-interrogation-program http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/senate-inte... Torture is illegal under the Eight Amendment. The Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times. If we're going to go against legal precedent as well as international convention, the burden of proof for torture's effectiveness is on torture advocates. The evidence provided does not stand up to scrutiny.
- CocaKoala 10y ago
  Your question is poorly formed because the basis of my comment was asking how you defined "work" in the context of waterboarding. You didn't provide any sort of definition, you just said "Well, maybe it worked for other people". But if it doesn't work reliably, for whatever "work" means, then it doesn't matter if it's successful sometimes and unsuccessful other times because if you don't have a way to distinguish the success from the failure, it's impossible to measure. That's why I asked you to clarify what you mean when you say it might "work".
- anentropic 10y ago
  well, either it means they were just gratuitously torturing him for fun, or it means they can't tell whether they were getting any useful information or if he had any to give neither option suggests the technique is useful it's also about as immoral as you can get

overcast 10y ago

For all the times it didn't work, how many times did it work for others? One person, with no information, doesn't mean anything.

chishaku 10y ago
"Here are eight cases cited in the report where the C.I.A. made the case that its tactics thwarted plots and led to the capture of terrorists, and how the committee's report undercut those accounts." http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-torture-work-the-cias-claims-and-what-the-committee-found.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-tor... Full report: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/senate-intelligence-committee-study-on-cia-detention-and-interrogation-program http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/senate-inte... Torture is illegal under the Eight Amendment. The Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times. If we're going to go against legal precedent as well as international convention, the burden of proof for torture's effectiveness is on torture advocates. The evidence provided does not stand up to scrutiny.
CocaKoala 10y ago
Your question is poorly formed because the basis of my comment was asking how you defined "work" in the context of waterboarding. You didn't provide any sort of definition, you just said "Well, maybe it worked for other people". But if it doesn't work reliably, for whatever "work" means, then it doesn't matter if it's successful sometimes and unsuccessful other times because if you don't have a way to distinguish the success from the failure, it's impossible to measure. That's why I asked you to clarify what you mean when you say it might "work".
anentropic 10y ago
well, either it means they were just gratuitously torturing him for fun, or it means they can't tell whether they were getting any useful information or if he had any to give neither option suggests the technique is useful it's also about as immoral as you can get