Torture doesn't work

[Latro]

@Hiker

Personally I believe that the credible threat of torture is a form of torture in itself and should never ever be used by the police.

No it is not real torture, that is ridiculous. As a coercion technique it is highly effective, so effective that actual torture often isn’t necessary.
You do have to have a reputation that you do torture, of course.
The GESTAPO and Abwehr, rarely had to do actual torture. A ‘friendly chat’ after arrest was usually enough.

In the same vein, the GESTAPO also did very little actual spying itself. The vast majority of people they got their hands on were denounced by other citizens.

[Hiker]

@Latro

No it is not real torture, that is ridiculous. As a coercion technique it is highly effective, so effective that actual torture often isn’t necessary.
You do have to have a reputation that you do torture, of course.
The GESTAPO and Abwehr, rarely had to do actual torture. A ‘friendly chat’ after arrest was usually enough.

In the same vein, the GESTAPO also did very little actual spying itself. The vast majority of people they got their hands on were denounced by other citizens.

I honestly cannot tell whether you are defending the methods of the Gestapo here. (But I hope you do not.)

But more to the point: Article 1.1 of the UN Convention Against Torture states:

For the purpose of this Convention, the term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.

(bolding mine)

So torture is not restricted to the “red iron” variant. You may debate whether the threat of torture counts as inflicting mental suffering. If you think that idea is “ridiculous”, I suppose the Gestapo might have agreed. I don’t.

[Shodan]

@GIGObuster

Well, in a previous discussion there was a cite from the Standford Philosophy dictionary that pointed to 2 examples that were told were valid, problem was that looking carefully one showed a big possibility that they got the wrong man and the tale was hearsay, and in the other the kid that they wanted to rescue from the kidnapper was most likely dead already.

I don’t believe the second example shows that torture doesn’t work. If the purpose of the torture was to elicit the location of the victim, then it worked. The fact that it was too late doesn’t affect that.

Actually I know enough history to report that that is not the exception, any government past and current can fall for the forbidden fruit of information gained with torture, it usually happens when a very reprehensible path needs to be followed, and so we got the Bush the lesser administration condoning torture and it got us false evidence to justify the Iraq invasion.

What evidence used to justify the Iraq invasion was obtained thru torture?

Unless you mean things like this.

Regards,
Shodan

[Human_Action]

@Shodan

If the purpose of the torture was to elicit the location of the victim, then it worked. The fact that it was too late doesn’t affect that.

Not exactly - no torture was performed. You could say the threat of torture elicited the location of the victim, but that’s not the same thing.

[Hiker]

@Human_Action

Not exactly - no torture was performed. You could say the threat of torture elicited the location of the victim, but that’s not the same thing.

As mentioned earlier, that is at least debatable. Most formal definitions of torture include the infliction of mental pain. The US Code of Law makes it even more explicit. Its definition of torture expressly includes

the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering

[msmith537]

@John_Mace

I asked a very simple question, with a yes or no answer. Would you or would you not give up the combo of your safe if someone was torturing your spouse? There is no need to complicate the hypothetical any more than that.

It’s a bit too simple. What is the downside to giving up the combo to my safe? Anything in there can be replaced easily enough.
Now ask whether a terrorist cares more about his wife or himself versus seeing his plan for jihad come to fruition.

Really, it’s a stupid argument. You mean to tell me with all the technology we have at our disposal, we still need to rely on pulling out fingernails and beatings with rubber hoses to gain valuable intel? I suspect proponents of torture are more about feeling like we are giving terrorists their just deserts rather than actually believing it’s an effective tool.

[Siam_Sam]

@DrDeth

Ok, we have given four or so cites which say it doesnt work. So, it’s now on you to give us a cite that sez it* does. *:dubious:

William Francis Buckley: “Major General Carl Stiner stated that ‘Buckley’s kidnapping had become a major CIA concern. Not long after his capture, his agents either vanished or were killed. It was clear that his captors had tortured him into revealing the network of agents he had established.’ According to the United States, Buckley had undergone 15 months of torture by Hezbollah before his death.”

It’s just wishful thinking that torture does not work. Again, it’s only in recent years that it’s become fashionable to think that, but wishful thinking is all it is. Also again, I’m not advocating it. It’s wrong, 99.9% of the time, but not liking something doesn’t make it not work. The closest many posters here have come to torture is probably having a credit card canceled.

[Little_Nemo]

@UDS

we are always more ready to believe that which confirms our preconceptions than that which is inconsistent with them.

I think you’ve summed up your argument quite well.

[GIGObuster]

@Shodan

What evidence used to justify the Iraq invasion was obtained thru torture?

Unless you mean things like this.

Regards,
Shodan

No wonder many do disregard your posts.

Playing coy is not helpful, specially because from the same post you are quoting I posted a link already to the Huffington post article that points to the key footnote of CIA report on the torture used during our detention program in the middle east.

Sam Husseini

The quote from the Huffington Article:

'Both Sides' Are Wrong: Torture Did Work -- to Produce Lies for War (See...

But that doesn’t mean Feinstein and McCain are right and that’s the end of story. The truth is that torture did work, but not the way its defenders claim. It worked to produce justifications for policies the establishment wanted, like the Iraq war. This is actually tacitly acknowledged in the report — or one should say, it’s buried in it. Footnote 857 of the report is about Ibn Shaykh al-Libi, who was captured in Afghanistan shortly after the U.S. invasion and was interrogated by the FBI. He told them all he knew, but then the CIA rendered him to the brutal Mubarak regime in Egypt, in effect outsourcing their torture. From the footnote:

“Ibn Shaykh al-Libi reported while in [censored: ‘Egyptian’] custody that Iraq was supporting al-Qa’ida and providing assistance with chemical and biological weapons. Some of this information was cited by Secretary Powell in his speech at the United Nations, and was used as a justification for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Ibn Shaykh al-Libi recanted the claim after he was rendered to CIA custody on February [censored], 2003, claiming that he had been tortured by the [censored, likely ‘Egyptians’], and only told them what he assessed they wanted to hear. For more more details, see Volume III.” Of course, Volume III has not been made public.

[GIGObuster]

@Siam_Sam

William Francis Buckley: “Major General Carl Stiner stated that ‘Buckley’s kidnapping had become a major CIA concern. Not long after his capture, his agents either vanished or were killed. It was clear that his captors had tortured him into revealing the network of agents he had established.’ According to the United States, Buckley had undergone 15 months of torture by Hezbollah before his death.”

It’s just wishful thinking that torture does not work. Again, it’s only in recent years that it’s become fashionable to think that, but wishful thinking is all it is. Also again, I’m not advocating it. It’s wrong, 99.9% of the time, but not liking something doesn’t make it not work. The closest many posters here have come to torture is probably having a credit card canceled.

Not clear really, just like in the recent case were a terrorist was captured a lot of the disappearances and killings can be explained by the agents assuming that their cover was blown. (The terrorist in Belgium was not tortured, but it is clear that he had information on him that gave the game away for others) But once again I also did mention that once in a blue moon the tortures will get lucky. As pointed before we know that someone will win the lottery, but that does not stop the fact that most of the players are just being tax fools. Same is with the ones using Torture. Not at paying taxes, just being foolish.

[Shodan]

@GIGObuster

Playing coy is not helpful, specially because from the same post you are quoting I posted a link already to the Huffington post article that points to the key footnote of CIA report on the torture used during our detention program in the middle east.

I’m not playing coy. I thought you were saying that the Bush administration tortured someone to get information to justify the invasion. Instead, apparently, someone is claiming that Egypt tortured them to say something that they later recanted, which is not quite the same thing.

Regards,
Shodan

[GIGObuster]

@Shodan

I’m not playing coy. I thought you were saying that the Bush administration tortured someone to get information to justify the invasion. Instead, apparently, someone is claiming that Egypt tortured them to say something that they later recanted, which is not quite the same thing.

Regards,
Shodan

Now that, is playing coy.

Ex-Bush Official: U.S. Tortured Prisoners to Produce False Intel that Built...

COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Amy, it’s probably the most seminal moment in my memory of those five days and nights out at Langley at the CIA headquarters with George Tenet and his deputy, John McLaughlin. Powell had rarely, in the some eight years or so I had worked for him to that point, grown so angry with me that he, in this case, physically grabbed me and took me to the spaces that were empty in the room adjacent to the DCI conference room, sat me down in a chair and essentially lectured me on how he was dissatisfied with and very unhappy with the portions in his presentation that dealt with terrorism, particularly the connections with Baghdad and al-Qaeda. And I quickly apprised him of the fact that I was just as uneasy as he was. He calmed down a bit, and he said, “Well, let’s throw it out.” We did. We threw it out.

Within about 30 to 45 minutes, we were back in the DCI conference room to resume that night’s rehearsal, and George Tenet himself laid a bombshell on the table. He essentially said—and these are almost direct quotes: “We have learned from the interrogation of a high-level al-Qaeda operative that not only were there substantial contacts between al-Qaeda and Baghdad, that those contacts included Baghdad Mukhabarat, secret police, Saddam’s special people, training al-Qaeda operatives in how to use chemical and biological weapons.” That’s almost a direct quote, Amy. At that point, Powell turned to me and said, “Put it back in.”

And from that point on, though I did take some of the stuff out as late as 2:00 a.m. in the morning in the Waldorf-Astoria prior to the morning of the presentation, and had Phil Mudd, George Tenet’s counterterrorism czar, standing behind me in the Waldorf, trying to prevent me from taking things out, until I finally told him I would physically remove him from the room if he didn’t leave of his own will, people were trying to get that portion back into the presentation. But the damage was done. The secretary, as you know, presented the information as if there were substantial contacts.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@Little_Nemo

I just want to be sure I’m understanding your position here. Are you saying that if torture worked, then there would be situations in which you believe it would be justifiable to use torture?

It really depends how you define justifiable. I think in most real-world situations, using torture is going to cause way more problems than it would solve even if it worked. But, theoretically; yes. That’s not to say the torturer would get off the hook. If the penalty for torture is 10 years in jail, and you torture someone and save 100 lives by evidence obtained, you should still go to jail for 10 years.

[DrDeth]

@Velocity

This is moving the goalposts.

First it was, “Torture (or the threat of torture) doesn’t get accurate information.”

Now, it’s “Torture (or the threat of torture) did get accurate information, but that accurate information didn’t help.”

Nope: *We are talking about getting significant Intelligence information- that can not be gained by less stressful methods.
*

The info was not significant, and it could have been gotten by other methods.

[Siam_Sam]

It is naive beyond words to believe that no actionable intelligence has ever ever gleaned over the millennia-long history of torture. The rightness or wrongness of it may be debatable, but to question its effectiveness is no different from the anti-vaxxers.

[Siam_Sam]

@GIGObuster

Not clear really, just like in the recent case were a terrorist was captured a lot of the disappearances and killings can be explained by the agents assuming that their cover was blown. (The terrorist in Belgium was not tortured, but it is clear that he had information on him that gave the game away for others) But once again I also did mention that once in a blue moon the tortures will get lucky. As pointed before we know that someone will win the lottery, but that does not stop the fact that most of the players are just being tax fools. Same is with the ones using Torture. Not at paying taxes, just being foolish.

Really? Are you serious? Fifteen months of intense torture, but still you doubt he gave anything away? You think torturers get lucky only “once in a blue moon”?

That’s it, I’m out of here. Enjoy your fantasy world, people.

[GIGObuster]

@Siam_Sam

Really? Are you serious? Fifteen months of intense torture, but still you doubt he gave anything away? You think torturers get lucky only “once in a blue moon”?

Yes, because I do take onto account why is torture used really for. And besides the terrorists in Belgium were not tortured and still the same thing happened, that terror cell accelerated their moves that lead to disappearances and the death of the members of that cell.

Among Hezbollah the tortures for sure were recognized for their efforts, and their leaders told their members how good they were, just as the Qaddafi men were about the false information that they gathered. I would not be surprised about how good they did during those 15 months, IMHO besides some good info there was also a lot of bad information that I would not be surprised caused a lot of problems for them.

@Siam_Sam

That’s it, I’m out of here. Enjoy your fantasy world, people.

As I noted it is then more likely that you do want to live in the world were authoritarians tell you about how great they are in protecting you with torture. Not me, what you have to realize is that armed with the information of what Hezbollah did I would support more Israel and anyone opposed to them for thinking that torture was such a great idea, pointing also to one big reason why torture should not be done, you only grain more enemies.

[Trinopus]

@Siam_Sam

It is naive beyond words to believe that no actionable intelligence has ever ever gleaned over the millennia-long history of torture. The rightness or wrongness of it may be debatable, but to question its effectiveness is no different from the anti-vaxxers.

No, that’s going way too far. To begin with, no one here has said that torture has never, ever, in the history of the world produced useful information.

But remember, the same is true of faith healing and astrology: every now and then, these methods, too, produce useful information.

“Torture doesn’t work” isn’t an absolute claim, but merely an absolutely stated observation that it works remarkably poorly, producing vastly less useful information than other methods. It’s a stupid and archaic approach, more in tune with the Holy Inquisition or the Praetor’s dungeon than with modern enlightenment. It’s like cutting off the hands of thieves, or castrating rapists. It’s barbaric…and even those methods don’t absolutely deter repeat crimes.

[Hiker]

@Trinopus

No, that’s going way too far. To begin with, no one here has said that torture has never, ever, in the history of the world produced useful information.

But remember, the same is true of faith healing and astrology: every now and then, these methods, too, produce useful information.

“Torture doesn’t work” isn’t an absolute claim, but merely an absolutely stated observation that it works remarkably poorly, producing vastly less useful information than other methods. It’s a stupid and archaic approach, more in tune with the Holy Inquisition or the Praetor’s dungeon than with modern enlightenment. It’s like cutting off the hands of thieves, or castrating rapists. It’s barbaric…and even those methods don’t absolutely deter repeat crimes.

I agree with most of this, except for the astrology part. Astrologers have never produced any useful information (unless they gathered it by means other than astrology). You cannot produce information that you do not possess, and it is not possible to gather information via astrology. What you were referring to are situations where the statements of an astrologer happened to *coincide *with reality. I am sure that occasionally happens, but it is different from a torture interrogation where the victim actually has the information that the torturer is looking for.

Other than that you are right. There surely can be and have been isolated cases where torture has provided the torturer with useful intelligence. So in that sense torture has “worked” there. But torture as a policy does not work, because its purpose to increase the effectiveness of an intelligence service or a police force is not achieved.

[coremelt]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but two very important reasons not to torture, whether or not it works.

1. unless you intend to kill the person or keep them in jail for life, torture will leave life long psychological scars on them reducing the chances of being able to rehabilitate them. The links between PTSD, addiction, suicide and self destructive behaviour are clear. Then of course there is the chance that the person you are torturing is actually innocent, and you’ve just fucked them up for the rest of their lives now.

2. Use of torture is an ace recruiting tool for the bad guys, if you ever let the tortured person go they’re going to go and tell all their fellow countrymen how they were tortured by the evil US government. Any country that uses torture loses all claim to a moral high ground and the government in question is seen as reprehensible by most of the rest of the world.