4 ms·

Statistically, how many attacks have been prevented by torture?

• davidf18 10y ago
  Well, that's a good question, but I might rephrase it: How many lives and injuries have been saved. Also, there is the situation of "the ticking bomb" where an appropriate intervention to get information could save lives.
  • dragonwriter 10y ago
    > Also, there is the situation of "the ticking bomb" where an appropriate intervention to get information could save lives. The idea that you know for a fact that a ticking bomb exists and know for a fact that a particular target has information about it which could save lives, but don't know enough to act without information from that subject and don't have a more reliable way of extracting information from the target than torture is implausible on a whole number of levels.
  • detaro 10y ago
    What is the answer for the rephrased question? The CIA and other organisations have been torturing "terrorists" quite a bit, they are remarkably quiet when it comes to naming examples to justify their actions. I'd honestly assume they have tortured more people that didn't have any knowledge about terrorism than they saved with the intel from those that did. Can you name examples for your ticking bomb scenario? (as in, someone with the necessary information was in custody and known to have the information?) As far as I know, this wasn't the case for any of the high-profile attacks you appeal to. There is little evidence torture actually works, and allowing it as a tool is way to ripe for abuse, even if you don't believe that torturing people is generally amoral. The data to support it just is not there.
  • casiotone 10y ago
    You have neatly sidestepped answering both my question and your rephrasing of my question. Would you care to answer either of them?