Does torture "work?" (poll for Debates thread)

[Johnny_Ace]

@Wesley_Clark

There are various things to consider on the issue.

1. Because the vast majority of people are morally opposed to torture, they will want to believe it doesn’t work. This desire is going to cause people to selectively reason to support the argument against torture.

And the argument on the other side boils down to the ends justifying the means.

2. What the US did as far as torture isn’t really that severe on a global or historical scale. Sending people’s children to concentration camps like North Korea does is far more severe than anything the US is willing to do. One person discussing the US’s torture process said ‘that barely counts as torture in the middle east’. Which is probably true. It is still torture but it isn’t as intense as what other nations do.

There’s no such thing as a little pregnant.

3. A big advantage of torture isn’t gaining information, it is to deter people from opposing the government. Knowledge that a person or their loved ones would face severe torture helps to prevent rebellion against an unjust government. So in that regards, torture does work pretty well. If it didn’t, then tons of nations wouldn’t have all come to the same conclusion to use it for this purpose.

Unfortunately, that has no effect on jihadists, or generally anyone outside.

[astorian]

@John_Mace

If the victim doesn’t know anything, then nothing works.

Well, if I were being tortured to extract info I don’t possess, I would tell the torturer anything I thought might make him stop. So, torture would “work.” It would definitely make me talk- it just wouldn’t give the torturer anything useful.

[Acsenray]

@Velocity

Whether a torture subject gives out other false information is irrelevant as well - this thread is about whether the total sum of information given out by a subject contains truthful information - be it sandwiched by false information or not.

Can you tell which information is true and which is false? If not, then the true information might as well be false.

[GIGObuster]

@Acsenray

Can you tell which information is true and which is false? If not, then the true information might as well be false.

Or useless. It would be funny if this subject was not grim, but one very example that was pointed in the GD tread as supporting torture actually showed that even if torture information was verified as true it was already useless info (in more ways than one) by the time it was confirmed. In a case of a plot to attack L.A…

For the poster that was a supporter of ‘torture working just better than a broken clock’ it should had been embarrassing to find later that the author of his cited article about the L.A. case admitted in the same cite that his article was undermined by the timeline of events.

But more embarrassing for the poster that is lukewarm about torture was that the very same author (that has plenty of military experience) that appeared early as a supporter of torture ‘being effective sometimes’ eventually came to write this:

http://jamesjoyner.com/2014/12/torture-doesnt-work-the-cia-torture-reports-long-shadow/

Torture Doesn’t Work

Much of the first day discussion of the report centered on the finding that “enhanced interrogation techniques [were] not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.” Despite claims to the contrary from the CIA, Vice President Cheney and others, this is not new news. Decades of experience by police, military and intelligence interrogators around the world had made it clear long before the 9/11 attacks that the most effective means of extracting useful information from suspects is to win their trust. While physical and psychological torture will certainly get people to talk, the incentive created is to say whatever it takes to get relief.

The report demonstrates that this lesson was learned yet again. Almost all of the useful intelligence merely corroborated what was already known from legitimate interrogations and much of the intelligence that was gathered was simply wrong. Indeed, some of the most brutal torture led to the worst intelligence, including information that led U.S. forces to target innocents. And almost all of the touted terrorist plots that were allegedly “disrupted” on the basis of evidence obtained from torture were fantastical at best.

Well, that was really a very dramatic demonstration of how the position of a former “on the fence” about torture military guy did evolve. Sadly, it seems that many Americans and people in other developed nations have their opinions devolving regarding this issue.

I do blame Trump for the up-tick in the devolution observed recently regarding the issue of torture in the USA, at least.

[John_Mace]

The question is not whether there is a better method, which is what that guy is saying. The question is wether torture can “work”. All he’s said is that the tortured individual will say whatever he thinks will make the torture stop. Unless he’s claiming that “the truth” is not one of the things that will make the torture stop, then he’s not saying “torture doesn’t work”. All he’s saying is that something else works better.

[dracoi]

@astorian

Well, if I were being tortured to extract info I don’t possess, I would tell the torturer anything I thought might make him stop. So, torture would “work.” It would definitely make me talk- it just wouldn’t give the torturer anything useful.

You’re thinking of torture in a Hollywood/Jack Bauer style, where you beat up one guy, get one answer and go defuse the bomb. That style doesn’t work so well, especially not with a determined enemy.

In the real world, though, you torture twenty people. You write down everything they say. The things that coincide between all twenty people is probably true, because the rest of what they said was fabricated just to make you stop. In order to fool you, the twenty people would have to create a false set of facts before the were caught, and then they’d have to remember and stick to that false set of facts.

Which is not to say that I support torture or that I think it’s the best method for getting this information. But it does work at least some of the time.

[DrDeth]

@Johnny_Ace

There’s no such thing as a little pregnant.

.

Well, yes, but there’s no bright line as to what is 'torture". Hot irons and the rack? Certainly. Waterboarding? Now, yes, but it seemed not so bad. Making you eat baloney sandwich and a pink jumpsuit? Playing the theme from Small World 24/7?

[DrDeth]

@astorian

Well, if I were being tortured to extract info I don’t possess, I would tell the torturer anything I thought might make him stop. So, torture would “work.” It would definitely make me talk- it just wouldn’t give the torturer anything useful.

From reading historical records, a surprising number of victims, once the torture starts, say “fuck this” and refuse to say anything.

[DrDeth]

@dracoi

You’re thinking of torture in a Hollywood/Jack Bauer style, where you beat up one guy, get one answer and go defuse the bomb. That style doesn’t work so well, especially not with a determined enemy.

In the real world, though, you torture twenty people. You write down everything they say. The things that coincide between all twenty people is probably true, because the rest of what they said was fabricated just to make you stop. In order to fool you, the twenty people would have to create a false set of facts before the were caught, and then they’d have to remember and stick to that false set of facts. .

20 people. 10 of which don’t know anything and will tell you anything. Of the remaining , four clam up and won’t say anything. Four forget under duress what it is you wanted to know, but tell you everything else. leaving you with two people giving you info. But you have to compare that to the ten victims who dont know anything and the four guys who perhaps did know something but forgot, so are just making shit up- and are telling you everything. And if the resistance is organizing into cells, the two guys who do talk dont give you the same info. And the problem is, other than the guys who clam up, you dont know who is babbling, who is lying, who forgot and who never knew in the first place.

This is why torture doesnt work.

[dracoi]

@DrDeth

20 people. 10 of which don’t know anything and will tell you anything. Of the remaining , four clam up and won’t say anything. Four forget under duress what it is you wanted to know, but tell you everything else. leaving you with two people giving you info. But you have to compare that to the ten victims who dont know anything and the four guys who perhaps did know something but forgot, so are just making shit up- and are telling you everything. And if the resistance is organizing into cells, the two guys who do talk dont give you the same info. And the problem is, other than the guys who clam up, you dont know who is babbling, who is lying, who forgot and who never knew in the first place.

This is why torture doesnt work.

If what you say is true, there’s no point in asking any question to any person for any purpose in any manner.

[Johnny_Ace]

@DrDeth

Making you eat baloney sandwich and a pink jumpsuit? Playing the theme from Small World 24/7?

That’s psyops…a different thing altogether.

[AHunter3]

You’d have to define “work”:

•Chris tortures Kim and Kim provides an answer to the question “Where is the gold buried?” - ??

• Chris tortures Kim and Kim provides a correct and truthful answer to the question “Where is the gold buried?” but Chris does not know, at that time, that it is a correct and truthful answer - ??

• Chris tortures Kim and Kim provides a correct and truthful answer to the question and Chris is able to ascertain (somehow) through the torture process that the answer is a correct and truthful answer, but Chris’s side of the conflict may or may not benefit from the exchange more than they lose from it due to acquiring a reputation as torturers / loss of trust and goodwill elsewhere etc – ?

• Chris tortures Kim and Kim provides a correct truthful answer that Chris is able to validate AND Chris’s side of the conflict does indeed benefit more than it loses from this exchange – ?
Only the bottom outcome is strongy desirable. The one immediately above it could be argued to be “worthwhile” for Chris and Chris’s side. I think the one above it is the best most-common outcome. And by it’s nature that means it can’t be distinguished from when it isn’t even THAT good.

[astorian]

@DrDeth

From reading historical records, a surprising number of victims, once the torture starts, say “fuck this” and refuse to say anything.

Well, those people are a lot tougher and braver than I am. Hurt me enough, and I’ll tell my captor anything I think he wants to hear, whether it’s true or not, and whether I really know anything or not.

[Velocity]

@DrDeth

20 people. 10 of which don’t know anything and will tell you anything. Of the remaining , four clam up and won’t say anything. Four forget under duress what it is you wanted to know, but tell you everything else. leaving you with two people giving you info. But you have to compare that to the ten victims who dont know anything and the four guys who perhaps did know something but forgot, so are just making shit up- and are telling you everything. And if the resistance is organizing into cells, the two guys who do talk dont give you the same info. And the problem is, other than the guys who clam up, you dont know who is babbling, who is lying, who forgot and who never knew in the first place.

This is why torture doesnt work.

What you said applies to every form of interrogation or questioning, torture or not.

[DrDeth]

@astorian

Well, those people are a lot tougher and braver than I am. Hurt me enough, and I’ll tell my captor anything I think he wants to hear, whether it’s true or not, and whether I really know anything or not.

Which is why I said “surprising”. But we havent watched our families get raped or machine-gunned, our nations invaded, our cities bombed.

I dont think I am all that tough either, but I might have said “fuck you” to the Nazis.

[kayaker]

@DrDeth

I dont think I am all that tough either, but I might have said “fuck you” to the Nazis.

Im a total pussy. I’d be all like, “Anne Frank? Dark haired gal? Yeah, I think she’s hiding in the attic”.

[billfish678]

@astorian

Well, those people are a lot tougher and braver than I am. Hurt me enough, and I’ll tell my captor anything I think he wants to hear, whether it’s true or not, and whether I really know anything or not.

Yeah, I LIKE to think how brave I’d be but statistically I gotta wonder how often the average person can hold out.

I suspect a fair number of failures when it comes to torture and getting info ain’t that torture doesn’t work that often…its that they are grabbing people who didn’t know anything. There’s a difference.

[Chronos]

Put it this way: If torture never produced any truthful information, then it would be the most useful interrogation technique ever devised. Heck, forget about interrogation: It would be the most useful information-gaining technique ever devised. In such a world, you could grab any old random person off the street, torture them, and ask them (say) “Is there life on Mars?”, and if they said “no”, you’d be able to conclude that the real answer was yes. Presto, that’s a lot cheaper than sending out all of those probes.

We obviously do not live in that world, thus, torture will sometimes elicit truthful pieces of information. But it’s still useless.