Torture to gain information from Terrorists.

[Goober]

Torture to gain information from Terrorists.

We seem to be discussing Torture without any reference – and under an Anti Convective Bias.

I have added some links – Also one by Michael Ignatieff on the Lesser Evil

Bin Laden Raid Revives Debate on Value of Torture
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html?_r=1

But a closer look at prisoner interrogations suggests that the harsh techniques played a small role at most in identifying Bin Laden’s trusted courier and exposing his hide-out. One detainee who apparently was subjected to some tough treatment provided a crucial description of the courier, according to current and former officials briefed on the interrogations. But two prisoners who underwent some of the harshest treatment — including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times — repeatedly misled their interrogators about the courier’s identity.

In 2004, however, a Qaeda operative named Hassan Ghul, captured in Iraq, gave a different account of Mr. Kuwaiti, according to the American official. Mr. Ghul told interrogators that Mr. Kuwaiti was a trusted courier who was close to Bin Laden, as well as to Mr. Mohammed and to Abu Faraj al-Libbi, who had become the operational chief of Al Qaeda after Mr. Mohammed’s capture.
Mr. Kuwaiti, Mr. Ghul added, had not been seen in some time — which analysts thought was a possible indication that the courier was hiding out with Bin Laden.

The Lesser Evil: Politics and Ethics in an Age of Terror -By Michael Ignatieff
'The Lesser Evil': Fight Fire With Fire

The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror | Foreign Affairs

Audio and Video versions available
The Lesser Evil: Politics and Ethics in an Age of Terror

History of Torture and Terrorism

Frequently Asked Questions | The Torture Question | FRONTLINE | PBS

There is no clear-cut answer. Studies of interrogation and torture have found that fear motivates people to talk. Interrogators may sometimes get good information: According to press accounts, after being tortured by Philippine authorities, Abdul Hakim Murad, a co-conspirator of 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef, revealed details about the Bojinka plot to crash 11 commercial airliners into the Pacific Ocean. As another example, many point to the ruthless 1957 French counterinsurgency campaign in Algeria in which using torture helped the French to brutally suppress the uprising in seven months.

Should it be legal to torture a suspect for information?

Techniques of torture used.
American Torture Techniques - A Guide to American Torture Techniques

Enhanced interrogation techniques - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[55Mercury]

Actually, I'm more for torturing convicted terrorists. thanks

make it public, and...

no need for a doctor

 

[Spade]

What I find tortuous are the are the machinations of the apologists for torture trying to present themselves as civilized.

 

[WLDB]

Actually, I'm more for torturing convicted terrorists. thanks

make it public, and...

no need for a doctor

Yeah, like in Rome. Lets roll back a few thousand years of progress.

We somehow got through both world wars without using it (officially anyway). The other sides used it regularly, as did the Soviets-none of them are around anymore.

People often use the most extreme case to justify it, such as an imminent terrorist attack. When has this situation happened? When has torture stopped the equivalent of a 9/11?

 

[Goober]

What I find tortuous are the are the machinations of the apologists for torture trying to present themselves as civilized.

Often times torture is not reliable. But on the rare ocassions I would hazard a guess it is.

 

[L Gilbert]

I simply don't advocate harm to anyone. Torture to prevent harm is simply rationalising the means to an end (and an iffy means at that because torture isn't exactly foolproof for determining accuracy of info).
I don't like the options for the poll.

 

[Goober]

I simply don't advocate harm to anyone. Torture to prevent harm is simply rationalising the means to an end (and an iffy means at that because torture isn't exactly foolproof for determining accuracy of info).
I don't like the options for the poll.

Make a new poll. Send me a PM - I will ask that the thread be closed. We can discuss the poll questions -

Then I will post it again.

I tried to give differing situations but I trust your intellect. So have at er.

Thank you

 

[L Gilbert]

Make a new poll. Send me a PM - I will ask that the thread be closed. We can discuss the poll questions -

Then I will post it again.

I tried to give differing situations but I trust your intellect. So have at er.

Thank you

I would but as there's no way to guarantee that the results of torture would be accurate until the issue becomes history, all I can suggest is that I'd be for torture if the results could be verified as to accuracy. That is pretty much impossible before the issue becomes history.

 

[Goober]

I would but as there's no way to guarantee that the results of torture would be accurate until the issue becomes history, all I can suggest is that I'd be for torture if the results could be verified as to accuracy. That is pretty much impossible before the issue becomes history.

We live in a new world where terror attacks will only increase.

Where mass causalities are at stake - time and information is critical. I can see all sorts of methods being used - From the one on one to the enhanced versions used by the US.

 

[L Gilbert]

We live in a new world where terror attacks will only increase.

Where mass causalities are at stake - time and information is critical. I can see all sorts of methods being used - From the one on one to the enhanced versions used by the US.

Yep. Me, too. But do we simply ignore those that were tortured for information that was inaccurate or downright fictional? I don't think the ends justify the means.

 

[Goober]

Yep. Me, too. But do we simply ignore those that were tortured for information that was inaccurate or downright fictional? I don't think the ends justify the means.

It ran rampnant - On that we can agree - used when it was in no way required.

 

[wulfie68]

I don't like any of the responses to be honest.

I don't think we should use torture per se: I think enhanced interogation techniques and the use of drugs can tell us more and with a greater accuracy. However, I don't think we should be discarding information that may have been gained through torture (by an ally). I also don't give a rat's ass if the country of origin of a miscreant will torture them if we return them after we capture them: not our problem if someone was stupid enough to put themself in that situation.

 

[SLM]

We live in a new world where terror attacks will only increase.

Where mass causalities are at stake - time and information is critical. I can see all sorts of methods being used - From the one on one to the enhanced versions used by the US.

You know Goober I watched a really interesting film on just this topic on the weekend. Fictional of course, but an interesting intellectual exercise none the less. It's called Unthinkable, if you get a chance you should check it out.

As to the overall topic, I'd have to say no, never. I would hope beyond all hope that I would have the courage of my convictions should the situation ever arise, that I would not post-rationalize an incident to try to justify it.

Maybe from a practical standpoint, if it indeed works in getting the truth, I don't know. But from a moral, ethical, philosophical standpoint, I just can't see where we could possible save humanity by being inhuman. There absolutely has to be a line drawn and if we end up going down because of that line, well so be it. How far is too far and what exactly do we lose by going there?

 

[mentalfloss]

As it stands I'm undecided on this issue as it really depends on answering questions relating to a number of factors I mentioned in the other thread.

 

[Cliffy]

We outlawed the death penalty because it put us in the same position as the murderer. Torture is terrorism and put us in the same position as the terrorist. And terrorism is a subjective matter. In places like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. we are the terrorists. It is a word that is bandied about to justify our murder of innocent women and children. That makes us less than animals on the international stage. Anybody supporting war and torture is a psychopath in my eyes and I have zero respect for them.

 

[mentalfloss]

We outlawed the death penalty because it put us in the same position as the murderer. Torture is terrorism and put us in the same position as the terrorist. And terrorism is a subjective matter. In places like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. we are the terrorists. It is a word that is bandied about to justify our murder of innocent women and children. That makes us less than animals on the international stage. Anybody supporting war and torture is a psychopath in my eyes and I have zero respect for them.

The problem is that the issue is too broad and we're looking at the morality in the act of torture and not the ultimate consequence that could result.

If anyone can legitimately prove that a suitable form of torture would save innocent, Canadian lives, then I would totally be on board with that. But that is the daunting task ahead for those peddling this bill, and we have to hold them to that task.

Everything else is just noise.

 

[lone wolf]

What sort of information can you get from someone who doesn't even know who his boss is let alone anyone in any other secret cell?

 

[MHz]

If anyone can legitimately prove that a suitable form of torture would save innocent, Canadian lives, then .......

Perhaps we have set our goals too high, perhaps if we were to be trying to find out if they were witches instead. The stack of corpses would prove we were diligently searching. The goal is to end up with the right to torture people, many people is even considered to be better than doing it to just a few. (that's what the lack prisons ore for, want to knpw how much it cost for a ring side seat?)

You also give the 'enemy' the right to use torture on our friends should they be in the wrong place at the wrong time, we get all whinny if the bodies aren't handled with kid gloves.

What sort of information can you get from someone who doesn't even know who his boss is let alone anyone in any other secret cell?

That is the whole idea behind 'compartmentalization', covert operation or just R&D in a private company. The only place full discolusre is ever found is on laptops that get left on park benches or where-ever.