John Mc Cain said they broke him. I would think he would know. It could be you know more though.Originally Posted by cotts135
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
John Mc Cain said they broke him. I would think he would know. It could be you know more though.
When I become dictator, I hope that all my "subjects" share your wisdom.
McCain's story:
"For the next four days, I was beaten every two to three hours by different guards . . . Finally, I reached the lowest point of my 5 1/2 years in North Vietnam. I was at the point of suicide, because I saw that I was reaching the end of my rope."
McCain was taken to an interrogation room and ordered to sign a document confessing to war crimes. "I signed it," he recalled. "It was in their language, and spoke about black crimes, and other generalities."
"I had learned what we all learned over there," McCain said. "Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."
Eventually, McCain also says he provided interrogators military information:
"Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant."
The effectiveness of torture is not measured by its ability to educe a confession -- true or not -- from the victim. It's measured by its effectiveness in educing reliable, militarily useful (i.e. actionable) information. It seems to me that McCain's torture, however brutal, failed to meet that test. There is no question that he was shamed by his failure to limit his answers to "name, rank and serial number", but that does not translate to having provided information of real value.
Dude…if it didn’t work they (we) wouldn’t continue using it as a method of extracting information…if there was an easier way they (we) would do it. While most of us would find participating or even watching someone being tortured reprehensible I know all of us enjoy our relative safety and diminishing freedoms daily.When I become dictator, I hope that all my "subjects" share your wisdom.
The link I had provided several posts ago (http://www.fas.org/irp/dni/educing.pdf) is for an analysis done for the DoD by a number of experts (including practitioners) on harsh interrogation techniques under the auspices of the National Defense Intelligence College. It notes that the general consensus of such experts is that such questioning is not very effective at educing useful information although it is great at educing "confessions". It notes that those who support such questioning tend to explain all failure as the product of poor execution. It also notes the absence of any scientific evidence either demonstrating the effectiveness of such techniques or proving them to be ineffective. On balance it seeme to suggest that the support for harsh interrogation stems more from the desire for something that will work than from any evidence that harsh techniques actually do work -- that is, it is better to do something that doesn't work than to admit that you have no idea how to do something that will.
Well is it is a published report on the internet it must be true…I must defer to your superior googling skills.
Jeff,
Why do you even try anymore? You must know by now that it is not worth the effort of finding a report prepared for the DOD with numerous credible authors by an organization with credible board members. It does not matter. Neither do any other articles that you could find that cite numerous experienced people in the intelligence business or John McCain who consistently say that torture is not worth the costs.
The article I posted earlier includes:Those here with the same perspective and reasoning as Cheney are clearly not interested in considering the downside of torture or want to consider alternatives that would be better for the long term. As hoosier clearly stated:In researching this article, I spoke to numerous counterterrorist officials from agencies on both sides of the Atlantic. Their conclusion is unanimous: not only have coercive methods failed to generate significant and actionable intelligence, they have also caused the squandering of resources on a massive scale through false leads, chimerical plots, and unnecessary safety alerts—with Abu Zubaydah’s case one of the most glaring examples.Even if torture doesn't work (Which I believe it does). If we were only using as retribution, I'm Ok with that.
I don't believe torture works well either. So I believe the best way to approach this situation is to line all of them up. Point a gun at their head and tell them to spill their guts. If they refuse,,,kill them and move on to the next man down the line. If no one at all talks thats OK because they had a choice to trade info for their life.
They made the choice and it was a valient one ,,,but OH well thats war.
I believe some one would talk.
I don't even like to see enemies tortured. However I don't see water boarding as torture or sleep depridation or dripping water on someones for head.
Pete
This is a perfect reason why torture doesn't work. Put yourself in that position, what are you going to tell the person with the gun to your head? Are you going to tell them something they don't want to hear? No you are going to say anything they want to hear.
Well if thats the case them kill them all . But I think one could gather all the info and sift through it and get bits and pieces of valuble info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
I don't believe torture works well either. So I believe the best way to approach this situation is to line all of them up. Point a gun at their head and tell them to spill their guts. If they refuse,,,kill them and move on to the next man down the line. If no one at all talks thats OK because they had a choice to trade info for their life.
They made the choice and it was a valient one ,,,but OH well thats war.
I believe some one would talk.
I don't even like to see enemies tortured. However I don't see water boarding as torture or sleep depridation or dripping water on someones for head.
Pete
This is a perfect reason why torture doesn't work. Put yourself in that position, what are you going to tell the person with the gun to your head? Are you going to tell them something they don't want to hear? No you are going to say anything they want to hear
I for one would not except a prisonor if I had my way about it.
I would let holy terror reign untill all is still ,,,,if you can't do that then you shouldn't go to war in the first place.
I think fighting a war and interviewing every dam person before you shoot them is a waste of money and american lives.
But thats me,,,, I might be an A hole or just to simple minded but you stop the killing when they wave the white flag or they kiss your boots. Until then fire away.
Pete
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote