Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
We have probably had a poll on this subject before but we have a lot of new member so what do you think?
We have probably had a poll on this subject before but we have a lot of new member so what do you think?
We have probably had a poll on this subject before but we have a lot of new member so what do you think?
If it is torture, it's more psychological than physical.
We have probably had a poll on this subject before but we have a lot of new member so what do you think?
It's both, but psychological is often more damaging and longer lasting than regular torture. Something to consider when you tell those who were innocent, . . . opps.
It could be construed as such, by a strict definition.
But "torture" can range from psychological tricks to things like pulling out fingernails and slow-roasting human beings over hot coals, or breaking them on the wheel as in the middle ages. As tortures go, water boarding is pretty mild. We do it to our own soldiers in SERE school.... they hate it but it does no lasting harm.
Should we be using it as an interrogation technique for dangerous terrorists who want to kill as many Americans as they can?
That's actually a tough question. If you think about 9/11 you'll understand the temptation.... if you think about how much worse bioterrorism or nuclear terrorism could be, you might find yourself considering things you'd never consider in everyday life.
In short, necessity and desperation are the bitch twin sisters of moral compromise.... and until your ass has been in a really tight spot, you don't know how far those two bitches may push you.
We have probably had a poll on this subject before but we have a lot of new member so what do you think?
Of course it is. That's never REALLY been the question. The question is should it be used, anyway? THAT'S the REAL question that people want to avoid. The question in the OP is a smokescreen.
I don't buy that for a minute. I could recover from the memory of being dunked in water a lot quicker than I could from having my ears cut off. Sometimes saying "pretty please tell us what you know" is not enough.
Depends on the situation. It's usually more effective to beat the answer out of someone.
And we shouldn't use it for the simply fact that info gathered from torture is not reliable, people will say anything to make it stop. We shouldn't waste time, and possibly lives by using techniques that won't get us solid info.
In some cases it may be, but it's reliability is questionable.
That's actually not true, and comes from a misquotation in the CIA interrogation manual titled KUBARK. What the manual actually states is that torture techniques can backfire if done incorrectly. It doesn't cause them to lie, because they know the consequences of lying. It causes them to shut down, and turn on the interrogator, which makes extracting any useful information impossible. Torture has to be used properly, in conjunction with good interrogation techniques in order to be effective.
Torture is an effective means of extracting information, it's why man has used it for thousands of years. The real question is can it be done ethically. The answer is no, however, there's nothing ethical about war.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?