Torture doesn't work

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@GIGObuster

As Dr. Ogrisseg noted, your SERE talking point was as valid as termite was for the 9/11 truters.
So much for your “lack of support” for it.

In any case you are still wrong.

BTW I did not use the same SERE cite to show before that it was not effective in real life, the reality is that I already cited others reporting how SERE was not effective. So take your accusations of me not making them before back.

I don’t think your cite says anything CLOSE to what you think it says. and your cites are generally bullshit. You link to opinions, anecdotes and one sided reports. So no you haven’t cited anything that says that the results from SERE training are not useful data in the debate of whether or not torture works.

Like I said, I think we are probably done. Noone that had an open mind on the issue of whether or not torture works is convinced by your side of the debate. The SERE training data is damning, the anecdotal information about instances where torture worked is too common, and logic and common sense about the limits of the human ability to endure pain work against you and all you have in your defense is the opinions of people who are vehemently against torture no matter what, some anecdotes where torture didn’t work (and a lot of instances where torture was abused), and a one sided report where noone who engaged in torture was involved, and a pretty good moral objection to torture sprinkled throughout the thread.

ETA: BTW, what did you mean by “So much for your “lack of support” for it.”

Are you implying that I actually support the use of torture? I no more support the use of torture despite its efficacy than i support the use of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons despite by belief they are effective.

[Pashnish_Ewing]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Are terrorist organizations led by people like Ken Lay who are in charge and yet still don’t know anything? It beggars belief. If your argument relies on assumption like “people who lead terrorist organizations might not know anything” then I’m not sure that there is a debate to be had with you.

Of course the leader of an organization ‘knows things’. But there is no way for the interrogator to know what ‘specific information’ they have, which ‘specific information’ is out of date, which ‘specific information’ is a smokescreen, etc. The torturee is only interested in one thing: saying what they think the interrogator wants to hear. This makes Torture extremely effective in garnering false confessions, or helping an interrogator build a case for predetermined pet theory. But, as a program, it is woefully ineffective at getting actionable intelligence.

The ‘torture works’ crowd just hasn’t thought their alleged scenarios through to the bitter end. How would you know when to stop torturing a suspect? How can you tell if the suspect is lying or simply doesn’t know the information you want? How many bones do you break before assuming the guy just doesn’t know? And once you move on from suspect A, how many suspects go through the process before you start to question the original intelligence that lead you on this mission?

Torture programs always spin out of control because these questions are impossible to answer. Torture doesn’t work.

[DrDeth]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Are terrorist organizations led by people like Ken Lay who are in charge and yet still don’t know anything? .

After we torture them so much they forget everything- yes.

[GIGObuster]

@Damuri_Ajashi

I don’t think your cite says anything CLOSE to what you think it says. and your cites are generally bullshit. You link to opinions, anecdotes and one sided reports. So no you haven’t cited anything that says that the results from SERE training are not useful data in the debate of whether or not torture works.

As soon as you said “I don’t think” you are using your opinion only.

Again, you do use SERE like 9/11 truthers use Thermite. Not really relevant to torture in a real live setting nor scientific at all.

@Damuri_Ajashi

Like I said, I think we are probably done. Noone that had an open mind on the issue of whether or not torture works is convinced by your side of the debate.

I already linked to many groups (some even from science settings) that are convinced, you are only relying on willful ignorance, actually double because here you are also denting that clearly many that investigate the issue seriously are convinced.

@Damuri_Ajashi

The SERE training data is damning, the anecdotal information about instances where torture worked is too common, and logic and common sense about the limits of the human ability to endure pain work against you and all you have in your defense is the opinions of people who are vehemently against torture no matter what, some anecdotes where torture didn’t work (and a lot of instances where torture was abused), and a one sided report where noone who engaged in torture was involved, and a pretty good moral objection to torture sprinkled throughout the thread.

You are still ignoring what many experts said, SERE is partially effective for the purpose, but it is more like a “Kobayashi Maru” scenario in Star Trek, a test used to show hand picked soldiers of how to react to an scenario where failure is the only option and the results known before hand. And that is just one reason why it was not science, nor evidence that torture works in a real setting.

The National Defense Intelligence College in Washington, DC made a report early about SERE in the context of intelligence gathering, it concluded that SERE was not applicable to real life settings.

educing.pdf

However, since the SERE program only lasts a few weeks, research with
SERE students would not help in assessing practices based on building certain
longer term relationships with the subject.

As the table shows SERE is not useful for real life settings as it does not offer opportunities to test extreme stress situations as the ones making the report tell us that it only did go to moderate stress levels in the training, and only with selected students.

@Damuri_Ajashi

Are you implying that I actually support the use of torture? I no more support the use of torture despite its efficacy than i support the use of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons despite by belief they are effective.

No wonder, there are indeed good arguments against their effectiveness, but that is another story that only shows how ignorant you are.

Once again, you are wrong about how effective torture is, and you are grossly wrong about how many do take my side, it is much more than you think, and in more open minded communities.

Torture: Why did the CIA spend $180m on bad science? | Martin Robbins

Luckily there’s another good argument, as I set out in these pages back in 2010 – torture simply doesn’t work. No compelling evidence has ever been put forward to show that torture can produce reliable intelligence. Worse still, the techniques used – typically causing stress, pain, sleep deprivation, or confusion – are textbook examples of ways to screw up a person’s recollection.

The intelligence and military communities have long accepted this to be true. The Intelligence Science Board provided scientific guidance to the US intelligence community on this matter, which I quoted at the top of this article. It was evidently ignored. In my 2010 article I quoted the US Army’s Training Manual, which states:

The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is prohibited by law and is neither authorized nor condoned by the US Government. Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.

The US Senate’s report on the CIA’s use of torture therefore tells us little we didn’t already know. Using the agency’s own records it found that torture “was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation.” In fact the CIA itself had reached the same conclusion more than a decade before, as the report pointedly notes:

… prior to the attacks of September 2001, the CIA itself determined from its own experience with coercive interrogations, that such techniques ‘do not produce intelligence,’ ‘will probably result in false answers,’ and had historically proven to be ineffective.

How did the CIA degenerate from that position into its current predicament? It’s difficult to tell from the brief glimpses revealed by the Senators’ executive summary, but part of the problem seems to be that the CIA found its own dubious experts, and built a research community that was basically divorced from reality.

[Velocity]

I would like to comment that in this thread so far, people have often been giving their own assumptions the broadest possible leeway, holding themselves to the loosest standards of proof, while trying to hold their opponents to the narrowest assumptions possible, to the toughest standards of proof. An interesting double standard.

[GIGObuster]

@Damuri_Ajashi

That is one of the stupidest fucking arguments we run into in the "does torture work debate. Torture doesn’t work because it works 100% of the time!!! WTF??? What you are really saying is that torture might get you false confession or wrong information from someone that doesn’t know anything.

:rolleyes:

Again, the reason why your SERE argument is like the thermite one for the 9/11 truthers is that used properly thermite is very effective, but attempting to claim that that was effective into bringing the WTC down, in a real live setting around working people and security in the WTC, it makes no sense.

You are indeed demanding that a lab setting that does not reach the levels of real life, nor the same conditions as in the field should be applicable. Not only wrong, but unscientific as many report.

You are, even if you do not notice it, reaching for a conspiracy theory just as many that rely in pseudoscience does. It does begin indeed by denying what experts told us about what SERE was all about. Ignoring then why the training is not the same and it is not really applicable to real conditions and that attempts at using SERE already showed failure in real life settings.

There is indeed clear conspiracy ideology when people first start denying the support the ones that claim that torture doesn’t work actually have. And then denying what the experts are reporting nowadays. Followed by the exaggeration about how an item like SERE (or thermite among 9/11 truthers or intelligent design among creationists or the sun among climate deniers) is what the “know-nothing” experts are ignoring.

[GIGObuster]

@Velocity

I would like to comment that in this thread so far, people have often been giving their own assumptions the broadest possible leeway, holding themselves to the loosest standards of proof, while trying to hold their opponents to the narrowest assumptions possible, to the toughest standards of proof. An interesting double standard.

Ok, tell me then if you do think that what the doctor or the The National Defense Intelligence College said about SERE is bullshit. Then explain why is it not that what you are telling us here is a false equivalence argument.

[Monty]

Food for thought:

Wen the FBI went looking for the best way to pry information from terrorists, they discovered it in the most unlikely of places: an almost-forgotten interrogator for Nazi Germany.

Hanns Scharff was a master manipulator, but not in the stereotypical Gestapo-like ways that usually come to mind. His tools were kindness, respect, empathy and guile.

The rest of the article is very informative.

[Velocity]

I think the much-mentioned SEAL SERE training example in this thread needs a bit more clarification on the circumstances. Did the SEALs have no incentive to hold out under the waterboarding (“Waterboarding will continue until you give up the code word, whether it takes us 5 minutes or 5 hours”), in which case they might as well give up immediately, or was there specific incentive to hold out as long as possible (i.e., “If you cannot withstand the waterboarding for at least 10 minutes, then you don’t pass the course and you get disqualified and can no longer be a SEAL”)?

[GIGObuster]

@Velocity

I think the much-mentioned SEAL SERE training example in this thread needs a bit more clarification on the circumstances. Did the SEALs have no incentive to hold out under the waterboarding (“Waterboarding will continue until you give up the code word, whether it takes us 5 minutes or 5 hours”), in which case they might as well give up immediately, or was there specific incentive to hold out as long as possible (i.e., “If you cannot withstand the waterboarding for at least 10 minutes, then you don’t pass the course and you get disqualified and can no longer be a SEAL”)?

One should consult Colonel Steven Kleinman, Senior Intelligence Officer, U.S. Air Force (1985-2008)

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/torturingdemocracy/interviews/steven_kleinman.html

So it’s training our military personnel to resist these interrogation methods that they wouldn’t otherwise know about?

Correct. The key is those SERE instructors in addition to lecturing, in addition to a variety of practical exercises, they do play the role of the adversary interrogator. Now, that's important to keep in mind -- they play the role. Their sum total of their experience is in a trained environment and they do it superbly well. I've seen them. I mean it is incredible. No wonder it leaves such a lasting impression on soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines who have completed it. They do a terrific job. But as one mentor of mine used to say all the time who was a senior SERE instructor for many years, he said that they are 51 percent SERE instructors and 49 percent interrogators. They need to do it well but the whole time they're watching the student, they're evolving their approach so that they can take this person to the edge but not any further. It's very difficult.

**But what they're not doing is collecting intelligence. It's a self-contained environment. They do not ask questions, they the SERE instructors, they don't ask questions the answers to which they don't already know.** You know, if they're interrogating a SEAL they can call the SEAL's unit and say, "When did he go to BUD/S training? When was he certified? When did he come in the Navy?" et cetera, et cetera. An interrogator under field conditions does not have that option to call the adversary's headquarters and say, "By the way, can you tell me a little bit more about this individual." So there's no element of detecting deception, there's no element of extended questioning to go into depth, I mean, it's very superficial. These are very short vignettes that they run.

So while it looks like an interrogation and it sounds like an interrogation and it even smells like an interrogation, it is not an interrogation. Those who have actually seen interrogations, and I've conducted many, many, many myself, it is the cliché; it's like watching paint dry in some respects because it can go on for hours. A lot of time is spent trying to develop some sort of bridge between you and the source. Plus you never know on the surface whether the person's lying to you. In addition to asking questions, very concrete, very precise questions, hiding your agenda so that they don't know the intelligence that you want, you're always having to test for veracity. You know, you want to make sure that your physical being, your non-verbal match with your verbals. It's an incredibly complex approach.

But back to why SERE is involved. So you have people overseas, commanders, they're not getting what they want out of these interrogators. I would love to find the person, track it down to the original source. But I bet you it wasn't just one person, but somebody finally -- the light bulb went on and said, "Wait a second. I can remember when I was." you know, and they can name which service's SERE school they attended. Those guys were pretty damn good. And they are. **I mean, they are damn good at portraying interrogators. But they're not intelligence officers and they're not skilled and experienced at eliciting information for intelligence purposes.

**
**If our purpose was, as interrogators, to do what the KGB was doing much of, during the show trials, and that is to force somebody to comply and create propaganda, then they’re great. They’d be perfect. But that’s not what we’re after; we’re after intelligence information, which is true. So you had these people coming out and they’re informing the special operators. They’re even trying to get involved themselves. And they don’t understand – they being the SERE instructors – don’t understand where their skill set, their experience, their understanding, and their expertise ends. And they’ve entered a new lane that they should – never should have entered. Because again, the model that they’re very experienced in using was one that could create compliance in a source, not cooperation. **

---

And intelligence.***

And intelligence, exactly. 

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Pashnish_Ewing

Of course the leader of an organization ‘knows things’. But there is no way for the interrogator to know what ‘specific information’ they have, which ‘specific information’ is out of date, which ‘specific information’ is a smokescreen, etc. The torturee is only interested in one thing: saying what they think the interrogator wants to hear. This makes Torture extremely effective in garnering false confessions, or helping an interrogator build a case for predetermined pet theory. But, as a program, it is woefully ineffective at getting actionable intelligence.

The ‘torture works’ crowd just hasn’t thought their alleged scenarios through to the bitter end. How would you know when to stop torturing a suspect?

How do you know when to stop interrogating an interrogation suspect?

How can you tell if the suspect is lying or simply doesn’t know the information you want?

How can you tell if an interrogation suspect is telling the truth? Sure the interrogation suspects are less likely to give false information but if you are a terrorist, why not send the imperialists on a wild goose chase.

How many bones do you break before assuming the guy just doesn’t know?

Well, considering that navy SEALS break within minutes of being waterboarded, I would say that breaking bones are probably going to rarely be necessary.

And once you move on from suspect A, how many suspects go through the process before you start to question the original intelligence that lead you on this mission?

How do you know these things with other interrogation methods?

Torture has the downside of almost always producing information whether or not the prisoner has any information.

However torture has the upside of almost always producing information when the prisoner has information.

Torture programs always spin out of control because these questions are impossible to answer. Torture doesn’t work.

Most of these questions are impossible to answer regardless of the method of interrogation.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@GIGObuster

As soon as you said “I don’t think” you are using your opinion only.

Again, you do use SERE like 9/11 truthers use Thermite. Not really relevant to torture in a real live setting nor scientific at all.

Great. Now people who point out that torture works 100% of the time are like truthers because … thermite. :rolleyes:

I already linked to many groups (some even from science settings) that are convinced, you are only relying on willful ignorance, actually double because here you are also denting that clearly many that investigate the issue seriously are convinced.

a scientist’s opinion before he conducts any science, is still just a fucking opinion. This is especially true if the scientist in question is trained in the discipline of political science.

You are still ignoring what many experts said, SERE is partially effective for the purpose, but it is more like a “Kobayashi Maru” scenario in Star Trek, a test used to show hand picked soldiers of how to react to an scenario where failure is the only option and the results known before hand. And that is just one reason why it was not science, nor evidence that torture works in a real setting.

There are in fact some unwinnable scenarios regardless of how much Kirk rejects the notion of no win situations. The corner cases (like the navy SEAL training helps us to determine whether or not torture CAN work. You seem to be saying that this is such a tiny corner that for all practical purposes, it proves nothing. It proves that when you apply torture to some3one who actually knows something that they don’t want to tell you, torture can be a significant inducement to tell you the thing they don’t want to tell you.

The National Defense Intelligence College in Washington, DC made a report early about SERE in the context of intelligence gathering, it concluded that SERE was not applicable to real life settings.

http://www.fas.org/irp/dni/educing.pdf
As the table shows SERE is not useful for real life settings as it does not offer opportunities to test extreme stress situations as the ones making the report tell us that it only did go to moderate stress levels in the training, and only with selected students.

sorry pdf not opening for me. I would take your word for it but your credibility is so shot that you cannot be relied on to correctly summarize anything (not because I think you are deceitful, just incapable of reading anything regarding torture without a bias).

No wonder, there are indeed good arguments against their effectiveness, but that is another story that only shows how ignorant you are.

:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:

OMFG are you seriously saying that nuclear bombs don’t work? Was the timing of the Japanese surrender just fucking coincidence?

Same with mustard gas or catapulting plague ridden corpses over castle walls or giving the American Indians smallpox-ridden blankets.

Once again, you are wrong about how effective torture is, and you are grossly wrong about how many do take my side, it is much more than you think, and in more open minded communities.

Torture: Why did the CIA spend over $180m on bad science? | Martin Robbins | The Guardian

They haven’t had the benefit of reading your lame arguments on why torture doesn’t work. It would make mother Theresa wonder about the efficacy of torture.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@GIGObuster

:rolleyes:

Again, the reason why your SERE argument is like the thermite one for the 9/11 truthers is that used properly thermite is very effective, but attempting to claim that that was effective into bringing the WTC down, in a real live setting around working people and security in the WTC, it makes no sense.

Sure and if you want to make the argument that torture was ineffective during the Salem witch trials, then you’ve got my support. If you want to say that because thermite wasn’t used in 9/11 it can’t be effectively used in a terrorist attack then I don’t really agree.

You are indeed demanding that a lab setting that does not reach the levels of real life, nor the same conditions as in the field should be applicable. Not only wrong, but unscientific as many report.

This coming from the guy that is using GAME THEORY as though it was science. ROFLMAO

You are, even if you do not notice it, reaching for a conspiracy theory just as many that rely in pseudoscience does. It does begin indeed by denying what experts told us about what SERE was all about. Ignoring then why the training is not the same and it is not really applicable to real conditions and that attempts at using SERE already showed failure in real life settings.

It does not require conspiracy for something as horrible as torture to have more public opponents than public defenders.

There is indeed clear conspiracy ideology when people first start denying the support the ones that claim that torture doesn’t work actually have. And then denying what the experts are reporting nowadays. Followed by the exaggeration about how an item like SERE (or thermite among 9/11 truthers or intelligent design among creationists or the sun among climate deniers) is what the “know-nothing” experts are ignoring.

Are you accusing me of denying opinions? I have no doubt that these are the genuine opinions of people who hold these opinions. But all those opinions put together do not constitute a consensus and it certainly doesn’t constitute science, no matter how much you want to add a patina of fact to your collection of anecdotes and opinions.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Monty

Food for thought:
The rest of the article is very informative.

Noone is saying that no other methods of interrogation work or that torture is always the best method of interrogation. Just that it can be an effective method of interrogation given the right circumstances.

[GIGObuster]

@Damuri_Ajashi

:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:

OMFG are you seriously saying that nuclear bombs don’t work? Was the timing of the Japanese surrender just fucking coincidence?

Yep, more ignorance from you:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-atomic-bomb/2015/07/31/32dbc15c-3620-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html

@Damuri_Ajashi

Same with mustard gas or catapulting plague ridden corpses over castle walls or giving the American Indians smallpox-ridden blankets.

Actually since the enemy could respond just the same it lead to just the same stalemate in the trenches, only with masks later in the war. Even Hitler realized why in WWII why they should not use them.

Yep, more ignorance.

@Damuri_Ajashi

They haven’t had the benefit of reading your lame arguments on why torture doesn’t work. It would make mother Theresa wonder about the efficacy of torture.

More from Colonel Steven Kleinman Senior Intelligence Officer, U.S. Air Force, that knew about what SERE meant.

There was also an SOP, standing operating procedure, issued by General Miller and we’ve seen a copy of it that says – that went out to Guantanamo that said, interrogation tactics used at US military SERE schools are appropriate for use in real world interrogations. They’re used to – at SERE schools to “break SERE detainees. The same tactics and techniques can be used to break real detainees during interrogation operations.”

Colonel Steven Kleinman: The refutation of that statement is contained within the statement. Anybody who would buy into the concept of breaking doesn’t understand interrogation. So if he says they use to “break” SERE students can also be used to “break” real world detainees, they’re missing – they’re making a connection that doesn’t exist; they’re talking about a phenomenon that doesn’t exist. And God bless General Miller, he’s served his country nobly for several decades. He’s not an intelligence officer nor is he an interrogator. I would venture to say that prior to his taking over responsibility for Guantanamo he’d probably never seen an interrogation.

It makes absolutely no sense to take an intelligence officer and put him in charge of an infantry or artillery unit, but somehow it makes all the sense in the world to take a combat arms officer and put him in charge of an intelligence operation of vital necessity and of great sensitivity. So I appreciate his intention to try to respond to the direction he was given to make things work, but I respectfully suggest he had no clue how to go about it. 

Yes, I was aware that SERE is not used to gain intelligence for a long time, the purpose of it is to train seals to resist or deal with torture. You are only showing all that your “trump” card is really not useful to demonstrate that “torture works”. In reality it does the opposite when we are talking about real life intelligence gathering.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Velocity

I think the much-mentioned SEAL SERE training example in this thread needs a bit more clarification on the circumstances. Did the SEALs have no incentive to hold out under the waterboarding (“Waterboarding will continue until you give up the code word, whether it takes us 5 minutes or 5 hours”), in which case they might as well give up immediately, or was there specific incentive to hold out as long as possible (i.e., “If you cannot withstand the waterboarding for at least 10 minutes, then you don’t pass the course and you get disqualified and can no longer be a SEAL”)?

Noone passed and yet we still have Navy SEALS. They never had to try for more than a few minutes. The test wasn’t whether or not you broke, it was how long it took to break you. And the result was that it took a matter of minutes, in every case, the Navy SEAL broke in a few minutes.

Sure, its an artificial situation but I think any reasonable person would agree that it is damning evidence against the “torture simply doesn’t work” crowd. It’s also a hell of a lot more “real” than game theory.

[GIGObuster]

As you can see Velocity, it doesn’t matter that it is an artificial situation that even the experts in the military pointed at the many reasons why it is not applicable in real life.

This is just the same as if a cancer researcher reported that they can cure cancer in the lab but when they try to apply the cure in the field they fail to stop the cancer. And then the researcher continues to declare that yep, he cured cancer… end of story. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@GIGObuster

One should consult Colonel Steven Kleinman, Senior Intelligence Officer, U.S. Air Force (1985-2008)

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/torturingdemocracy/interviews/steven_kleinman.html

Your link doesn’t seem to be responsive to the question you are responsidng to. It does seem to be yet another opinion by yet another person courageously coming out in opposition to torture.

[GIGObuster]

@Damuri_Ajashi

Your link doesn’t seem to be responsive to the question you are responsidng to. It does seem to be yet another opinion by yet another person courageously coming out in opposition to torture.

:rolleyes:

Air Force Reserve Colonel Steven Kleinman is a veteran military interrogator who has spent his career in human intelligence. He was a senior interrogator in Panama, the first Gulf War, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The former head of the Air Force’s strategic interrogation program, Colonel Kleinman has also been an instructor in the Air Force Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape training.

Gee I wonder what those last 4 capital letters make?

This BTW is yet more evidence that you were wrong by declaring that no one is supporting what I have been saying. Again it is relying in conspiracy theories when one begins by denying right away the levels of support the people that tell you that “torture doesn’t work” have in reality.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@GIGObuster

Yep, more ignorance from you:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-atomic-bomb/2015/07/31/32dbc15c-3620-11e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html
Actually since the enemy could respond just the same it lead to just the same stalemate in the trenches, only with masks later in the war. Even Hitler realized why in WWII why they should not use them.

Yep, more ignorance.

Yes, Of course there were other factors at play in World War fucking II but are you seriously trying to argue that the two nuclear bombs didn’t work (not just in the sense that they actually detonated but in the sense that they helped convince the Japanese to accept unconditional surrender)?

You see the title of your linked article:

“Sixty-six years ago, we dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima. Now, some historians say that’s not what ended the war.”

Do you know what that implies about what all the rest of the fucking historians are saying?

Ignorance indeed.

More from Colonel Steven Kleinman Senior Intelligence Officer, U.S. Air Force, that knew about what SERE meant.

Yes, I was aware that SERE is not used to gain intelligence for a long time, the purpose of it is to train seals to resist or deal with torture. You are only showing all that your “trump” card is really not useful to demonstrate that “torture works”. In reality it does the opposite when we are talking about real life intelligence gathering.

And yet it worked EVERY FUCKING TIME. A 100% success rate.