6 ms·

Your premise is pure fantasy. There was never a ticking time bomb scenario. And torque is NOT an effective means of extracting information. Everyone from Napole

Your premise is pure fantasy. There was never a ticking time bomb scenario. And torque is NOT an effective means of extracting information. Everyone from Napoleon to Hitler to our own Military generals have aid as much. Here's a good article on the subject: http://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/nov/04/2 http://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/no...

connie_lingus 12y ago
i'm sorry, but this simply flies in face of logic. it is absolutely morally wrong, but it certainly can be effective and has been used throughout history. usually, things that don't work don't last anywhere near that long. there are all sorts of reasons to oppose it, which of course I do, but saying it cannot be effective just isn't one of them.
- skj 12y ago
  "Logic" is not what you're using here. People thought the earth was flat for, well, a long time. Things that are false can last quite a while.
  - aninhumer 12y ago
    >Things that are false can last quite a while. Like the idea that people thought the world was flat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth
- Sumaso 12y ago
  What?!?! When John McCain was tortured and was asked to give up the names of his squad mates, he gave the names of the front line of the green bay packers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_and_military_career_of_John_McCain#Arrival http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_and_military_career_... Clearly torture is an effective way of getting useless information, you have no way to tell if the info is correct or not, and the prisoner has no incentive to give you the correct information. People who were cooperating were still tortured, for no apparent reason! (See the section on Rectal Feeding And Hydration:) http://www.businessinsider.com/the-senate-is-about-to-release-the-cia-torture-report-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-senate-is-about-to-releas... So no, its just people being messed up. There is no logic. There is no reason.
  - webXL 12y ago
    There is only one justification, and it does happen to be the ticking time bomb scenario, only when you've exhausted all other (effective) investigation methods. But that's so rare that if it ever did happen in human history, the bomb would have probably detonated anyway. So it's practically useless and counterproductive. The bottom line is if you have to resort to torture, too many systems have failed, and you have to seriously question the values you're trying to preserve.
  - tzs 12y ago
    > you have no way to tell if the info is correct or not, and the prisoner has no incentive to give you the correct information (In the following, I'm trying to just discuss the technical aspects of this. When I ask if or suggest that something would be effective, it is not meant to imply that if torture can be made effective then it is OK to do it. The ineffectiveness of torture as currently practiced is just one argument against torture, and so if it can be made effective that still leaves the other anti-torture arguments intact). Wouldn't this largely depend on what type of information you are trying to get and how much you already know? If you already have information that I know that you are not supposed to know, and I don't know you already have it, you can ask about that while interrogating me in addition to asking about whatever it is you are really trying to get. That should give you some feedback on whether or not I'm giving correct info. Wouldn't it also depend on how many other people you are interrogating over the same subjects? If you are questioning me and several other people about a particular thing, and I make up something on the fly to get you to stop torturing me, my made up story might not be the same as the made up stories of other people, whereas the stories of the people who tell the truth will agree. Of course, we could all have been trained to expect to be interrogated over this, and all have consistent prepared lies to give. Your counter to that would be to try to capture and interrogate lower level people or people who were less directly involved so that they are less likely to have prepared stories to give. I can believe that torture as currently practiced is almost always ineffective, but I suspect that this may be due to them relying on psychologists to figure out how to do it rather than bringing in engineers, scientists, and mathematicians and treating it as some kind of noisy and unreliable channel problem.
maroonblazer 12y ago
>And torque is NOT an effective means of extracting information. Then how do you explain this case in Germany where simply threatening torture resulted in the perpetrator divulging the location of his victim: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/world/kidnapping-has-germans-debating-police-torture.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/world/kidnapping-has-germa...
- cloakandswagger 12y ago
  I don't think you deserve to be downvoted for providing a concrete, real world example that supports your argument.
  - uxp 12y ago
    But his concrete argument (while being factually correct) is irrelevant. No one was tortured, but was threatened with torture In the case of Abu Zubaydah, in his first 2 months of capture he provided more information than at any other time. The "enhanced" torture techniques didn't start until about his 3rd month of detention. In both cases, the threat of torture, among other future conditions that don't fall under the "enhanced" umbrella (simple solitary confinement, life in prison, unable to see family, etc) were enough to extract valuable information. Subjecting them to humiliating and physically brutal conditions did nothing. tl;dr: threatening torture can motivate people to divulge information, but performing it does nothing further.
    - cloakandswagger 12y ago
      Threats mean nothing if there is no possibility that they'll be followed up on. As unfortunate and dark as it is, we have to be willing to torture for the threat to be effective.
- aaronbrethorst 12y ago
  The key distinction is that in this case it was a matter of simply threatening torture Torture would not have produced more useful results, and may have actually produced less useful results. Threatening it, on the other hand, seems to have worked. The issue with the CIA torture scandal is that you have a bunch of guys who may or may not know anything. These guys are interrogated, and, probably, disclose everything they know. Then, the higher ups at the CIA, acting on the authority of Cheney[1] and Bush[2] required that the guys being held—who may or may not know anything more or at all—be tortured to extract more information. At this point, the guys being held who may or may not know anything are going to start telling their 'enhanced' interrogators anything they can in order to stop what's happening to them. It doesn't matter if it's real or fake. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/09/dick-cheney-defends-torture-al-qaida http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/09/dick-cheney-def... (and it's important to note that the Senate report on this subject revealed that torture had nothing to do with the discovery of bin Laden's location.) [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-bush-knew-about-cia-torture-says-cheney-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-bush-knew-about-cia-tortu...

connie_lingus 12y ago

i'm sorry, but this simply flies in face of logic. it is absolutely morally wrong, but it certainly can be effective and has been used throughout history. usually, things that don't work don't last anywhere near that long. there are all sorts of reasons to oppose it, which of course I do, but saying it cannot be effective just isn't one of them.

skj 12y ago
"Logic" is not what you're using here. People thought the earth was flat for, well, a long time. Things that are false can last quite a while.
- aninhumer 12y ago
  >Things that are false can last quite a while. Like the idea that people thought the world was flat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth
Sumaso 12y ago
What?!?! When John McCain was tortured and was asked to give up the names of his squad mates, he gave the names of the front line of the green bay packers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_and_military_career_of_John_McCain#Arrival http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_and_military_career_... Clearly torture is an effective way of getting useless information, you have no way to tell if the info is correct or not, and the prisoner has no incentive to give you the correct information. People who were cooperating were still tortured, for no apparent reason! (See the section on Rectal Feeding And Hydration:) http://www.businessinsider.com/the-senate-is-about-to-release-the-cia-torture-report-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-senate-is-about-to-releas... So no, its just people being messed up. There is no logic. There is no reason.
- webXL 12y ago
  There is only one justification, and it does happen to be the ticking time bomb scenario, only when you've exhausted all other (effective) investigation methods. But that's so rare that if it ever did happen in human history, the bomb would have probably detonated anyway. So it's practically useless and counterproductive. The bottom line is if you have to resort to torture, too many systems have failed, and you have to seriously question the values you're trying to preserve.
- tzs 12y ago
  > you have no way to tell if the info is correct or not, and the prisoner has no incentive to give you the correct information (In the following, I'm trying to just discuss the technical aspects of this. When I ask if or suggest that something would be effective, it is not meant to imply that if torture can be made effective then it is OK to do it. The ineffectiveness of torture as currently practiced is just one argument against torture, and so if it can be made effective that still leaves the other anti-torture arguments intact). Wouldn't this largely depend on what type of information you are trying to get and how much you already know? If you already have information that I know that you are not supposed to know, and I don't know you already have it, you can ask about that while interrogating me in addition to asking about whatever it is you are really trying to get. That should give you some feedback on whether or not I'm giving correct info. Wouldn't it also depend on how many other people you are interrogating over the same subjects? If you are questioning me and several other people about a particular thing, and I make up something on the fly to get you to stop torturing me, my made up story might not be the same as the made up stories of other people, whereas the stories of the people who tell the truth will agree. Of course, we could all have been trained to expect to be interrogated over this, and all have consistent prepared lies to give. Your counter to that would be to try to capture and interrogate lower level people or people who were less directly involved so that they are less likely to have prepared stories to give. I can believe that torture as currently practiced is almost always ineffective, but I suspect that this may be due to them relying on psychologists to figure out how to do it rather than bringing in engineers, scientists, and mathematicians and treating it as some kind of noisy and unreliable channel problem.

maroonblazer 12y ago

>And torque is NOT an effective means of extracting information. Then how do you explain this case in Germany where simply threatening torture resulted in the perpetrator divulging the location of his victim: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/world/kidnapping-has-germans-debating-police-torture.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/world/kidnapping-has-germa...

cloakandswagger 12y ago
I don't think you deserve to be downvoted for providing a concrete, real world example that supports your argument.
- uxp 12y ago
  But his concrete argument (while being factually correct) is irrelevant. No one was tortured, but was threatened with torture In the case of Abu Zubaydah, in his first 2 months of capture he provided more information than at any other time. The "enhanced" torture techniques didn't start until about his 3rd month of detention. In both cases, the threat of torture, among other future conditions that don't fall under the "enhanced" umbrella (simple solitary confinement, life in prison, unable to see family, etc) were enough to extract valuable information. Subjecting them to humiliating and physically brutal conditions did nothing. tl;dr: threatening torture can motivate people to divulge information, but performing it does nothing further.
  - cloakandswagger 12y ago
    Threats mean nothing if there is no possibility that they'll be followed up on. As unfortunate and dark as it is, we have to be willing to torture for the threat to be effective.
aaronbrethorst 12y ago
The key distinction is that in this case it was a matter of simply threatening torture Torture would not have produced more useful results, and may have actually produced less useful results. Threatening it, on the other hand, seems to have worked. The issue with the CIA torture scandal is that you have a bunch of guys who may or may not know anything. These guys are interrogated, and, probably, disclose everything they know. Then, the higher ups at the CIA, acting on the authority of Cheney[1] and Bush[2] required that the guys being held—who may or may not know anything more or at all—be tortured to extract more information. At this point, the guys being held who may or may not know anything are going to start telling their 'enhanced' interrogators anything they can in order to stop what's happening to them. It doesn't matter if it's real or fake. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/09/dick-cheney-defends-torture-al-qaida http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/09/dick-cheney-def... (and it's important to note that the Senate report on this subject revealed that torture had nothing to do with the discovery of bin Laden's location.) [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-bush-knew-about-cia-torture-says-cheney-2014-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-bush-knew-about-cia-tortu...