In the comments section of this post I have already been accused of Sullivanesque hysteria from those on the right and of being a ‘good German’ and torture apologist from those on the left, so why not see if I can piss more people off. To wit, this part of the NY Times story:
What specialized training the unit received came on the job, in sessions with two interrogators who had worked in the prison for a few months. “There was nothing that prepared us for running an interrogation operation” like the one at Bagram, the noncommissioned officer in charge of the interrogators, Staff Sgt. Steven W. Loring, later told investigators.
Nor were the rules of engagement very clear. The platoon had the standard interrogations guide, Army Field Manual 34-52, and an order from the secretary of defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, to treat prisoners “humanely,” and when possible, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. But with President Bush’s final determination in February 2002 that the Conventions did not apply to the conflict with Al Qaeda and that Taliban fighters would not be accorded the rights of prisoners of war, the interrogators believed they “could deviate slightly from the rules,” said one of the Utah reservists, Sgt. James A. Leahy.
“There was the Geneva Conventions for enemy prisoners of war, but nothing for terrorists,” Sergeant Leahy told Army investigators. And the detainees, senior intelligence officers said, were to be considered terrorists until proved otherwise.
The deviations included the use of “safety positions” or “stress positions” that would make the detainees uncomfortable but not necessarily hurt them – kneeling on the ground, for instance, or sitting in a “chair” position against the wall. The new platoon was also trained in sleep deprivation, which the previous unit had generally limited to 24 hours or less, insisting that the interrogator remain awake with the prisoner to avoid pushing the limits of humane treatment.
But as the 519th interrogators settled into their jobs, they set their own procedures for sleep deprivation. They decided on 32 to 36 hours as the optimal time to keep prisoners awake and eliminated the practice of staying up themselves, one former interrogator, Eric LaHammer, said in an interview.
I understand that a sizable portion of the population thinks “Screw it- I am not going to get worked up about terrorists being tortured.” While that is disturbing, I am afraid it is a reality we have to live with right now.
With that in mind, I still contend that torture and ‘deviations’ in standard interrogation practices don’t work. Put aside all the other things that I find wrong about torturing people- that it sullies our name and creates deadly animosity, that it demans what we stand for, that it dehumanizes the enemy and thus makes it easier for additional abuses to occure, that it is illegal, and that it is just plain immoral to treat humans inhumanely. Put all that aside for now, if you will.
I want to see the evidence that torture works. Let’s see the evidence. Show me the intelligence that was gained from these methods. Show me how more intelligence was gained from ‘alternative’ interrogation methods as opposed to normal and human questioning. Show me that the intelligence gained from ‘deviations’ from interrogation policy resulted in better intel. That isn;t too much to ask, now, is it?
In other words, show me the money.
Jeff
“I want to see evidence that torture works”
OK, it worked when President Palmer used on Roger Stanton to find out about the nuke.
It also worked when Jack Bauer used it on Syed Ali.
Anderson
N.b. that the NYT story says that most of the torturers didn’t even think the guy was really a terrorist. He was handed over to them by an Afghan leader who was later discredited for giving us innocent people he’d rounded up, so’s he’d look productive.
Nikki
Actually, Anderson, the story says he gave up innocents for an act that he himself committed.
KC
Amen, John.
Stormy70
I don’t think torture works as an interogation technique. I don’t think you will get true answers, just the answer the detainee will think will stop the physical torture. They will say what they think you want to hear.
Shawn
LOL @ Jeff. I was going to post, “Just watch 24!”
John, I found an interesting article by WaPo called The Torture Myth.
It’s an interesting article, but not the proof you’re looking for.
Jeff
The fact that torture isn’t effective ought to be the common ground for the left and right on this issue. If torture were wrong but effective, that would be a fight. But it’s wrong and ineffective, so why are we having this debate? In addition, it’s important to remember that if we’re using ineffective techniques on a real terrorist, we are paying the opportunity cost of not getting information we might have otherwise.
TJ Jackson
And your codeword clearance is?
Have you servedin intelligence? Served in the military? So exactly what is your basis of observation regarding the effectiveness of interogation methods?
Kimmitt
But it’s wrong and ineffective, so why are we having this debate?
Because there are a lot of sadists out there.
jeff
TJ: Would you please inform us about the evidence YOU have, presumably from your own military experiences, that torture is effective. I have seen lots of evidence that it IS NOT. Your comment simply makes NO statement regarding the effectiveness of torture. There is, regretably, much evidence to support the position that torture is bad for American interests in the war on terror. Remember the war on terror? That’s what we’re trying to win… get it?
Ben Lange
Stress positions aren’t torture.
Sleep deprivation isn’t torture.
But for those hysterical ninnies who think anything other than a four-star hotel room is torture, I must ask: if we can’t even be mildly unpleasant with terrorists, then why not simply exercise our right to summarily execute them?
John Cole
Stress positions aren’t torture.
Sleep deprivation isn’t torture.
Who said they were?
ppgaz
There are two unresolved issues here.
One: If torture “works”, is it permissable? My answer would be “no”, unless the lives and safety of people are immediately and proximately and unambiguously in danger, and no other approach can work. Even then, frankly, I don’t trust anyone I know of to make the decision in a way that is morally acceptable to me.
Two: Even more importantly, can torture — or just bad treatemtn — be acceptable when detainees are a mix of threats? A mix that includes, by virtue of the laws of probability, persons who represent no real threat all? Persons inappropriately caught in a web of circumstances which throws them into the mix?
If I need something in regard to Number One, above, to push me one way or the other, it is Number Two.
I can ‘t find that torture is acceptable under any circumstances. I am not persuaded by any argument I’ve seen to the contrary, and that includes morons who think that the tv show “24” illustrates any truth relevant to the subject. It doesn’t.
The Other Jeff
Jeff,
I think TJ’s point is that, and I’m not saying i agree with it but I have wondered, is that people keep saying torture never works.
Well, going on the obvious assumption that CIA activity and other various covert ops would be highly secretive and highly classified, there’s always the chance that they have successfully used torture and we don’t know about it. How could we, short of sending Sandy Berger somewhere to swipe the documents and put them in his boxers?
Again, I’m not saying i agree, but i have wondered about it when people keep saying “show me torture works”.
Jeff
ppqaz,
You’re the moron is you thought that refernce to “24” was anything other than sarcasm.
Anderson
Thanks, Nikki.
ppgaz
I’m sorry … which reference was it that you thought I was referring to, again? I made no reference to any particular reference, did I?
I’ve seen dozens of them in recent weeks. But of course, since I made no reference to any in particular, you are entitled to pick one out, right?
Drop dead.
My remarks stand as written, and they are centered around two very specific points …. and I’m right.
ppgaz
Here’s my reference:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20050502.shtml
jack
“In other words, show me the money”
What proof would you accept?
Of course torture works. It’s been used by humanity since the dawn of time.
The fallacious notion that it doesn’t is put forth by those who question the morality of it.
Give me twenty minutes, the proper tools, and I could have most people telling me–accurately–whatever I ask them.
John Smith
The question I have is simple:
Are conditions in Prisons in the U.S. any better than that of the prison in question? From my limited knowledge, all of the ‘torture’ performed in Afganistan is performed in U.S. prisons, if not by the guards, then by other prisoners.
The basic problem here isn’t the fact of torture, but rather the fact that any prison or prison-type setting is inherently dehumanizing to both the guards and the prisoners.
Jeff
Ppqaz,
Stop backtracking, moron. YOu thought the first comment to this post was serious.
Everybody blew off Cal Thomas’ idiocy two weeks ago.
Shawn
Jack, I don’t think anyone is saying torture will never work. I think the question is “Is it effective?” I’m sure you’re right that torture will work sometimes. Since I can’t know anyone’s point of view but my own, I’m thinking about how I would react.
Scenario 1-Ask me under duress to tell you where my valuables are? I’ll talk til I’m blue in the face. You probably wouldn’t have to lay a finger on me.
Scenario 2-Ask me about something really important, like where my son is so you can harm him? You’d have to kill me.
Scenario 3-Ask me something I don’t know then torture me to get the answer? I’ll make something up just to get you to stop.
So, the way I see it, you would only get the right answers if the detainee knows the answers and if the information isn’t that important to the detainee.
Is it enough to get an answer? Or would you want the right answer?
I would say that it is more important to get the right answer. I’ll see if I can find an article I read awhile back. It talked about interrogation techniques and the amazing results they get. If I can find it I’ll post it here.
ppgaz
No, you lying sack. I never saw the “24” reference there, I was always referring to the flap over Thomas’ column.
I generally don’t read most posts to a thread, because I really don’t give a flying fig about them, unless they are either interesting, which is not often, or from John, whose views I respect even when we disagree.
ppgaz
And, if you paid attention to anything other than your own sorry prattle, you’d find that the Thomas column has been seen at this site before .. which is, in fact, where I heard about it in the first place.
I’m sure that many people were just being “sarcastic” about the reference, but the point is, Thomas was not. He — and you — are the morons.
https://balloon-juice.com/archives/005094.html#005094
scs
Just on a gut feeling, I think that actual torture would induce someone to just lie. However, stressfull situations over time might cause someone to lower their guard and spill the beans.
Thats why you ask your boyfriend over and over “Did you kiss her?”. The first time he says no, and then after the hundreth time he says “Okay I did it! Will you leave me alone now!” Detectives use it too apparently, asking the same questions over and over again until a suspect confesses. We’ve seen examples of that from several child killers, and the runaway bride, in recent months, who have confessed.
Its all about pressure, not torture.
BumperStickerist
And your codeword clearance is?
—> Classified, but I had compartimentalized clearnace.
Have you servedin intelligence?
—> Yes, 6903rd ESG, Cryptolinguist.
Served in the military?
—> Yes. USAF, fully qualified CAT III/Trainer Linguist
So exactly what is your basis of observation regarding the effectiveness of interogation methods?
—> None whatsoever … direct interrogation of foreign nationals was outside the job requirements of a 208 (now 98 series)
… what’s your point?
I don’t develop the vapors to the extent that John does with regard to ‘torture’ … but the discussion hinges on the specifics and the policies used to develop the actions taken in specific circumstances.
A great emotionally cathartic discussion on the goodness/ badness of it all.
However, then, there’s John’s question which is whether or not ‘torture’ is effective.
Mike Ritz says ‘yes’
—
Mike Ritz — a former military interrogator who teaches not only interrogation but how to resist torture – says in some cases, torture is effective.
/// RITZ ACT ///
I’m going to be one of the few interrogators who will bluntly say, torture works. But it only works if the person asking the questions knows how to ask the right questions. If you’re asking the right questions, and you’re not leading them, you’re not coercing them and just trying to get a confession, or trying to get them to say what you want to hear, if you’re truly asking the questions properly, (then) it’s an effective tool.
/// END ACT ///
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/05/iraq-040504-26e8a702.htm
—-
The article then goes on to say that you don’t really need to use torture and that there are social implications to state-endorsed torture. But, John’s question was more basic – does torture work? At least one person says ‘yes’.
tom scott
OFF TOPIC: Bumper Stickerist how is “Skivvy Nine” doing. Class of 73-75. Up on the hill then. Analyst, Surveillance and Warning Center Supervisor. Back then it was USAFSS vice ESC. The linguists I worked with there were the best of anywhere I’d been.
Dinsdale Pirahna
“if we can’t even be mildly unpleasant with terrorists, then why not simply exercise our right to summarily execute them?”
That’s presuming that they’re all terrorists, not some cab driver who happened to be in the wrong place, or some mentally ill person turned in by a warlord just to pad his quota of “terrorists” turned over to the U.S. for the bounty. The Times article also reported torture and mistreatment that seemed to be just for it’s own sake, for the entertainment of some cruel, sick, twisted individuals and which had no intelligence value whatsoever.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is the norm here, at least for now. Why should that not be the standard for our behavior in countries in which we’re trying to “promote democracy”?
Kimmitt
Once you understand the wingnuts’ concept of “democracy,” you start to understand how they think it might grow out of the barrel of a gun.
Ben
The only place I’ve seen any kind of definitive proof of torture working is Jesus Christ Supercop, but maybe that’s just because I haven’t watched “24”.
CaseyL
Interrogation professionals – that is, people in the military and the intelligence services whose jobs are to interrogate prisoners – say torture is an ineffective way to gather intel.
They go farther than that, actually: They say torture is *counterproductive.*
Torture is particularly counterproductive when you’re talking about “terrorists planning an attack.”
Because, one, your prisoner might not be one of the terrorists. He or she might not have any useful intel at all – or, if he or she was set up to be captured by you – they’ve probably been given wrong information, precisely so they can give that wrong information to you. And they don’t know the info they have is wrong: assuming they talk at all, they’re giving you what they have.
Two, even if you’ve lucked out and caught a real terrorist, he or she is very strongly motivated to see the attack happen. They’ll feed you wrong leads, half-truths, old info… anything to delay you, to send you on wild goose chases… until the attack happens while you’re still putting the screws to them.
This has been hashed over so many times, in so many places, that it’s really not debateable anymore. There is no good reason – not morally, not ethically, not tactically, not strategically – to support torture.
Which just leaves bad reasons:
Vicarious or actual sadism on the part of torture groupies.
Scapegoating: torturing the prisoner to express your loathing of The Enemy.
Triumphalism: torturing people just ‘coz you can.
Jon H
jack writes: “Of course torture works. It’s been used by humanity since the dawn of time.”
Why, yes, it’s so successful it has even obtained confessions of the impossible.
For example, confessions of witchcraft, consorting with the devil, and eating enough babies to depopulate a large town (which lack of babies somehow was never noticed).
Now, if torture can get someone to make shit like this up, what on earth makes you think it is effective?
“It’s been used by humanity since the dawn of time.”
I would also remind you, that for thousands of years, people did remarkably stupid things out of sheer ignorance.
Do you drink mercury when you feel ill? Do you have your barber bleed a few pints out of you when you get the flu?
Jack, if torture works so well, how would you use it to determine innocence?
TJ Jackson
Jeff:
Do you spend your life making untenable assertions? Could you cite any proof you have the torture doesn’t work? Can you name any intelligence service that doesn’t use some form of torture?
Please don’t display your ignorance so publically. The Gestapo was able to insure the resistance in Europe was relatively feeble by breaking their cells. They did not use comfy chairs to do this.
The VC and French in Indochina developed it into an art form.
The French used these measures under Massu to destroy the insurgents in Algiers. But of course you know better. Pray tell us exactly how do you know? have you served as interogator with police or security forces? Have you served as an intelligence official?
Or do you just prefer to sit there and shovel. Documented? What a frace I guess that’s why so few intelligence services use torture these days. What a twit.
Kimmitt
Jackson is right. If you torture enough people with enough care and do not care if you torture innocent people or not, torture can be an effective tool of repression.
The question is, then, do we care whether or not we torture innocent people, and are we repressors?
jack
Jon, those torturing confessions of witchery out of people, or torturing to get people to convert to Christianity were not actually trying to find anything out. They were trying to get people to do something–confess to a capital crime, admit heresy. Truth was not an issue. All that mattered was getting those words out of the people’s mouths. In that, they were very sucessful.
And now to Shawn…
“Scenario 1-Ask me under duress to tell you where my valuables are? I’ll talk til I’m blue in the face. You probably wouldn’t have to lay a finger on me.”
This is information that most people will easily give up. Very little torture is needed to get this.
“Scenario 2-Ask me about something really important, like where my son is so you can harm him? You’d have to kill me.”
While it might be asked, most who understand torture know that there are things that people would die before divulging. In a scenario like this a wife or another child’s life would be threatened, forcing the torturee to make a choice. It’s best in this situation to let them do whatever they want to whoever they’ve got. They’re going to kill them anyway. At least your son might escape. Sadly, many people fall for it.
“Scenario 3-Ask me something I don’t know then torture me to get the answer? I’ll make something up just to get you to stop.”
A good torturer will be able to tell rather quickly whether or not you actually know something. Lying will not stop torture. If what you say cannot be verified torture will continue or resume.
Some torture should be fatal. Allowing someone to live after
serious torture is bad for them, and you. You, because they will tell, they will try to get back at you. And them, because they are damaged in ways that will only get worse as time passes, depending on the type of torture.
The sleep deprivation, forced postures and intimidation and embarrasment are very mild forms of torture. Most are used as valid forms of questioning in police departments all around the globe. Many are used by parents disciplining their children (go stand in the corner–forced posture–, you’re going to bed without supper–food deprivation–)
Torture is still with us because it usually works and it’s usually effective. Mercury as a curative was abandoned because it’s not.
Jeff
TJ: Look for some answers to the question of whether torture works in this thread. You’ll notice some differences of opinion, but generally a consensus that it is not very effective, and is mostly ineffective or counterproductive. Here’s the point. Even if there are ways to carefully use torture, those ways don’t include sending any old suspect to any old army reservist for a beating and a hang-up by the wrists like Abu Garib. I suppose in your vast military wisdom, you’ve got some reason to think that torture does work. If I give you that point, will you give me the point that our tactics in this war, involving large scale random brutality, aren’t the way to maximize the use of this method? See, because that’s the bottom line, as I see it. Torture in some theoretical world may work now and again, but what has been done in the last two years in our name is ineffective AND counterproductive. Tag… you’re it.