Godboy
Diamond Member
- Dec 29, 2008
- 36,953
- 19,829
- 1,905
When done intelligently, torture has always worked and it always will. If im in the CIA and i know things about my captive, things hes done, people he works for/with, etc, then i torture him and see if hes lying or telling the truth when i ask him about those things.Once you know hes telling you the truth on a number of questions you already knew the answer too, you can assume hes telling you the truth on any other question. Plus, if i ask a terrorist for the address of his boss and he gives me a fake address, ill just be right back in his celll, torturing him until he gives me usable information. Lying to "make it stop" wont prevent the torture from eventually getting to the truth.Torture doesn't work. The CIA knows this. General Mattis said this and he's been on the front lines where in a moments notice you or those you direct can lose their lives. In the pinch, when you are desperate for answers and believe there may be imminent attacks, I can accept it in limited scenarios as a last ditch effort to demand information, but ultimately, in general, it's mostly ineffective. There have been some who have identified some successes, and others who say it was a waste of time. Without any special inside knowledge, I tend to side with the latter.
I've watched some great documentaries on military intelligence interrogations, from the Vietnam Era and beyond. These guys were good, some of the best. The Germans in WWII were particularly creative, and there are outstanding OSS videos that illustrate how simple chat can give away so much. Some of the stuff I've seen dealt with hardened terrorists, in time, they were broken down and gave actionable intelligence. Not a finger was lifted to harm them. A serious game of psychological warfare in which they saved lives, instead of some primal torture action of revenge for the past, which won't help future U.S ops.
There is a way to get answers, torture could often be more of a liability than a benefit even if they do tell you information, as they often do so just to stop the suffering. So now you waste time and resources chasing ghosts, instead of having legitimate intel. That in itself can cost lives.
Moreover, if you engage in this you lose the higher ground AND you place your own agents at risk of torture. After 9/11 emotions were high, people were rightfully enraged, some felt they had failed in their duties. So, extreme measures were taken.
I think it came down to "we are unprepared and don't have the intelligence we should have, we need answers fast, what's coming next if anything"? If there was suspicion of an imminent attack, well, all bets are off. My gut tells me this was more a reaction of fear by Western intelligence than some proven interrogation tactic.
Torture might have certain limitations, but anyone who says it doesnt work at all is lacking an imagination.
Last edited: