# Torture is Most Likely Very Effective **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 23, 2009, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098 "2009-04-23T14:22:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/221 "2009-05-01T08:17:16Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Not really; “Kill the unbeliever” is much more central to Christianity. That’s how it because so widespread in the first place, not by Peace And Love. All this stuff about how _ **nice** _ Christianity is, is simply revisionism about a barbarous belief system that spread itself by the sword. This is probably best suited for another thread but Christianity, as I understand it, shifted from the capricious god of the Old Testament to a god of love in the New Testament. I’m no fan of organized religion but seems to me all too many adherents of Christianity miss the central tenets it teaches. Pretty sure if we made a WWJD analysis of torture, and really applied his principles, he’d not find torture kosher. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/222 "2009-05-01T10:44:13Z")
This thread addresses the efficacy of torture. Any further discussion of the relationship between torture and religion, (or any other social system), should be taken to its own thread. [/Modding] ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/223 "2009-05-01T13:11:39Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I pointed out the KUBARK manual to you before and the assessment that it was not keen on using torture. For all your complaints that we read up seems you ignored it till someone did it for you. You mean [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11085070&postcount=184)? You didn’t quote or link to the KUBARK manual, let alone the relevant parts of it as quoted by Kobal2, you only cited another study’s reference to the manual, which said that “it also describes how those methods may prove ultimately counterproductive” and “does not portray coercive methods as a necessary — or even viable”. Not much to go by. Which is besides for the fact that you introduced this in context of a response to another issue (i.e. whether a memo necessarily reflect the view of most experts at an agency or just senior leadership). Did you cite it elsewhere? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/224 "2009-05-01T13:30:15Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You mean [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11085070&postcount=184)? You didn’t quote or link to the KUBARK manual, let alone the relevant parts of it as quoted by Kobal2, you only cited another study’s reference to the manual, which said that “it also describes how those methods may prove ultimately counterproductive” and “does not portray coercive methods as a necessary — or even viable”. Not much to go by. Which is besides for the fact that you introduced this in context of a response to another issue (i.e. whether a memo necessarily reflect the view of most experts at an agency or just senior leadership). > > Did you cite it elsewhere? Yes that post as well as saying, “Their own interrogation manual calls into question its effectiveness,” in post #190 (which was in direct response to a question you posed asking for clarification of the post you just cited about KUBARK). I’d have thought reference to the CIA’s interrogation manual and pointing out the manual itself was not keen on torture would be of interest to you. Didn’t realize Googling “KUBARK” was too much effort for you after it was tossed out there as a discussion point. I recall you admonishing us earlier in this thread that we ought to read more (which we have done). You prefer to let others do the work for you I guess. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/225 "2009-05-01T13:47:23Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Didn’t realize Googling “KUBARK” was too much effort for you after it was tossed out there as a discussion point. I recall you admonishing us earlier in this thread that we ought to read more (which we have done). You prefer to let others do the work for you I guess. I’m sorry but I don’t and can’t go look up and read everything that is “tossed out there as a discussion point”, and I don’t expect anyone else to either. But I do carefully read posts that I comment on and know what they are linking to when they cite things, and think others should be expected to do the same. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2009, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/226 "2009-05-01T15:31:51Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > The problem with this statement is that if you have good intel and you’re pretty sure the guy has the information, _every_ interrogation method is going to prove more reliable, almost by definition. Even an Ouija board is going to prove more reliable, if you already have enough intel to discount half your incorrect attempts. Agreed. Can we settle it if I said “less unreliable than with other methods”? ---
**Author:** ![RedSwinglineOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a9adbd/32.png) [@RedSwinglineOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedSwinglineOne)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098/227 "2009-05-04T17:16:04Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > I think the OP pointed out the simply grabbing people and torturing isn’t very effective (to say the least). However, if you have good intel and you’re pretty sure the guy has the information, torture might prove more reliable. > > In conclusion, it doesn’t work as a means to simply making people speak, but it may be better when you have “done your homework”. I think this would be the worst way to use torture. If you torture someone to get confirmation of something you believe to be true, you will get the confirmation you sought, and yet you will have learned nothing. “Do you have WMD’s?” “No” (rips off fingernail) “Do you have WMD’s?” “No” (rips off another fingernail) “Do you have WMD’s?” “Yes.” “I knew it!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/torture-is-most-likely-very-effective/494098.md?page=11)