We all know it works but it is more if a question of ethics. We all would like to think we are above these tactics but when it comes to National Security every option should be left on the table. The people who say these tactics don't work are lying to themselves.
If a person is placed under a certain amount of physical pain, instinct will compel them to do whatever they can to stop it. There is a small chance of incorrect information being given, but if under pressure a person will not be able to think of a convincing lie. Torture is not usually the right path to take, but an effective one.
Torture actually works. Placing someone under crazy conditions will make anyone do what you want them to do. I do not agree with torture, but it does work. The problem is that it is looked down on by many people, though I doubt those that are doing the torturing care.
If the information given can be verified and retribution for giving misinformation will be swift and merciless, why would anyone lie.
Example: "The pain will stop when you give us this information, but if we find out that it is false we will squeeze your balls in a vise."
Would you lie. I don't think so.
Hi, I'm Gazelle. Welcome to Zootopia.
You will have to dance with me at my concert.
You like to dance? Me too! I'm impressed.
Judy and Nicholas will come to my concert too so practice pls.
What? You are already practicing? I'm impressed so much!
I'm saying again but. Hi, I'm Gazelle.
If it didn't work people wouldn't have been doing it for centuries. That's the dirty truth all the 'it doesn't work' claims simply pale in the face of ample historical accounts where torture (or just the threat) has clearly worked to provide the information people wanted. The key thing however is that you have to use it 'correctly', namely it's not useful as a generalized technique to try and collect information you might not know.
If however you have something you specifically want to know and that can be verified: where someone/something is, who someone is, etc. Then it's basically 100% effective as no one can resist it for an extended period. This is why for instance despite feeble claims that torture is ineffective even hardened Special Forces are told as little as possible about wider operations because it's simply understood that even they would not be able to resist revealing damaging information (that could be elsewhere verified) under torture.
The entire "oh they'll just give you false leads to make it stop" angle is an absurd rebuttal anyway, as for some reason the people that spew this argument never seem to bother with the fact that the subject could just as easily feed you misinformation under 'non coercive' interrogation. Seriously in fact they have ever reason to do so, since if you are in fact committed to a totally hands off approach they will face no retribution whatsoever. In that case they have ever reason in the world to feed you plausible sounding, but totally fabricated lies to waste your time and resources.
Even if you discover them to be lies later on after doing footwork, well… you won’t touch him so what are you going to do about it? Ask him nicely if he would pretty please tell us, the people he hates, the truth this time so we don’t have to waste resources chasing lies?
Obviously regardless of what method is used to gain information it must be considered against known faces and verified independently, that’s not an inherent drawback to torture whatsoever. In point of fact ‘non coercive’ interrogations still somehow manage to produce many, many confessions that end up, based on other evidence, being false so the same argument against torture could easily be made against it as well.
Seems like questioning anyone is useless since they MIGHT lie or might misremember something. I suppose we should just stop wasting our time on questioning anyone I suppose.
Having been on the receiving end of torture, I can state that it really works. The pain is so great that you just give in. Does that justify its use against American citizens? No, never! Nor is it justified against foreigners, but it is employed against them like crazy. Believe it or not, the torturers are sustained by it-yes sustained!
I would have to say that no, torture does not work. While there may be a few cases where it does in fact work, it seems that more often than not the opposite proves true. How often have you heard, "I'll tell you whatever you want to know, just please stop!" As someone else stated, that doesn't mean they'll tell you the truth. It could just be information you want to hear, or untrue information. Also, there are the select few masochistic people who enjoy (some forms of) torture, in which case it would have no effect on them. I also saw a case in a show recently (albeit an extreme case) where someone ended up killing themselves to stop the torture being inflicted on himself, not providing his torturers any information at all.
Torture does not work. It does not work, because it does not yield accurate information. When you torture someone, they will say ANYTHING to make it stop. This includes giving false information and unhelpful information. Torture also does not work, because it only serves to turn whole communities against you, which can cost more lives in the long run.
When interviewed by Washington post US army COL. Stuart Harrington who has actually conducted interrogations in places such as Iraq Vietnam and various other areas said interview "torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop."", and according to US army Interrogation Training Manual "…the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."
also according to Ali Soufan a former F.B.I special agent with more experience in this issue then you reader or I have in this issue said
"When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information you're getting is useless."
If someone were being tortured for information and they actually believe in their cause wholeheartedly, they are unlikely to give information. If they were to give information, that information could very well be invalid or corrupted and there would be no way to see if it is so. The person being tortured could be innocent in the first place, and therefore they would be tortured for something they haven't done.
All it does is make people tell you what they think you want to hear so that the pain will stop. Torture is a good way to get information, but it's a bad way to get accurate information.
You also have to keep in mind that somebody who is being torture is likely so addled in the head that the information that they give should automatically be taken with a grain of salt, anyway. We don't communicate in our clearest or more accurate way when we are under duress.