Are enhanced interrogation techniques effective in soliciting national security-related information?

  • Enhanced interrogation techniques have the ability to provide viable information that could save American lives.

    Enhanced interrogation techniques have the ability to save American lives because they can squeeze information out of KNOWN terrorists and eventually lead to information about terrorist organizations, potential attacks, and other significant information. If enhanced interrogation is used correctly by government agencies like the CIA and the military, then it can be a worthy technique used to gain information.

  • If it were closer to home, would you not be ok with it?

    I agree with these interrogation techniques. If "torturing" one or a group of individual(s) is going to help protect a country in which children and innocent civilians reside, then yes I will support it. These people have no care for innocent people, for children, why should I care about their comfort while under arrest and interrogation. "Gee you are a terrorist, let me go ahead and give you a nice place to sleep, food to eat, and treat you like a king while you know when, where and who is attempting to attack my country??? " Call me cold, evil or whatever you want but I will support it if that means protection for innocents


    The range of techniques is quite intimidating in themselves. While they are effective, we must question whether or not it's OK to do unto others what we ourselves portray in the news as unacceptable by our enemy. We must play by the rules that we wish others to play by.

  • We have to do what we have to do

    Sometimes you have to get information from certain people. There is nothing inhumane about this, just remember that tragic day of 9/11, so many men and women were killed and we were supposed to sit back and do nothing? We want information, we need information, so we do what we have to do.

  • Yes!

    Enhanced interrogation has been used for years in many different forms. For some it has been very effective but for others it doesn’t do any damage. The reason it has been used was to get information from someone by torturing the victim so they will speak. For many years this has been a problem to some because of what the victim is going through. Many people believe that torture or enhanced interrogation shouldn’t be used by the C.I.A for gathering information or for anything else. But on the other hand the facts don’t lie about how effective it is.

  • Yes

    If we have information that a known or suspected terrorist is planning a suicide bombing or some sort of attack, then we need to do whatever is necessary to extract the information out of them. Whether it be water boarding, taking pliers to their stomach, or shooting them in the knee-caps. WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY!

  • Given the events of 9-11, I believe that the government needs to use whatever means necessary to ensure the safety of the American people.

    If we do not allow the government to use interrogation techniques some may deem unconventional, we are not allowing them their full resources to extract any information that could be detrimental to the American way of life. The protection of America's freedoms and security are, above all, first and foremost in the concerns of our government.

    Posted by: FlimsyMichael72
  • Enhanced interrogation techniques are effective and necessary for the procurement of valuable information.

    Considering the nature of terrorists, most who are willing to die to serve
    their purpose, it is necessary to use unique and enhanced methods of getting information out of them. Anyone who is considered a threat to our
    national security is fair game to whatever means are necessary to resolve
    that threat.

    Posted by: MarsBIue
  • In fact, all of the supposed "atrocities" abroad are going to be heavy hitters in my system called enhanced imprisonment:

    domestic common prisoners should get Gitmo'd in solitary confinement (a gulag can be substituted at the prisoner's request) until they are willing to be subjected to EIT's. If they refuse, their food rations should get cut.

  • Enhanced interrogation techniques have the ability to make the toughest talk, via the threat of impending death, even if the threat is only perceived.

    The range of techniques is quite intimidating in themselves. While they are effective, we must question whether or not it's OK to do unto others what we ourselves portray in the news as unacceptable by our enemy. We must play by the rules that we wish others to play by.

    Posted by: daveyxh
  • Advanced Interrogation is a bad thing.

    We should not be using this form of grilling because many criminals die from this. That criminal might have the important and that would be very bad if you didnt live because you would not be able to get multiple information. We should not satrt this type of torture for criminals.

  • No, they are not effective.

    They aren't effective, as the CIA has stated the techniques used are harsh and harmful. They are just scaring the prisoners and may lead them to say stuff that therefore may not be true. The prisoners can mislead the interrogators and lead them in a whole different path with may be the prisoners goal but that is not the interrogators goal.

  • No, "Enhanced Interrogation" aka "Torture" Motivates False Information & Sells Out Societal Ethics

    Elizabeth I (Tudor) of England was an opponent of torture having witnessed first-hand the inaccuracy of information solicited by this means. Elizabeth knew people would give any lie the interrogator wanted to hear escape torture (which was not always successful anyway--they were STILL tortured!) So attributing opposition to torture to James I is inaccurate--Elizabeth I was likely a more vocal (and experienced) opponent of torture. Submarining the Ethics of one's Society does not justify the means. A good example is the "10 Moral Dilemmas" that so many persons find unsolveable--and yet they are not--all 10 have solutions!

  • No, enhanced interrogation techniques are not effective.

    Enhanced interrogation techniques are no more effective in soliciting national security-related information than regular interrogation techniques. If anything enhanced interrogation techniques are less effective in soliciting information. Enhanced interrogation techniques can often lead to false information.

    Posted by: AverageHoward86
  • Leading experts in the field of prisoner interrogations agree that "enhanced interrogation" techniques, better known as torture, are ineffective, at best, and damaging to our efforts, at worst.

    Matthew Alexander, an Air Force Special Forces officer with over 20 years of experience, and who has conducted or supervised over 1300 interrogations, wrote a book a few years ago entitled "How to Break a Terrorist: The U.S. Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq". In it, he talks about how water-boarding and other forms of torture, which we, in Orwellian doublespeak, now refer to as "enhanced interrogation techniques" were ineffective and cruel, and that all they did was get people to tell you what they think you want to hear. He talks about how it was Israeli techniques, which are based on standard police interrogation methods, that lead to Musab al-Zarqawi being tracked down. We used to execute the Japanese during World War II when they water-boarded our soldiers. Why is it now moral and justified to use these techniques ourselves? They have been proven to be ineffective, and they simply give our enemies justification against us. It behooves us, both logically and morally, to discontinue their use.

    Posted by: MagicalRodrigo30
  • Enhanced interrogation techniques are not effective, because they produce false information.

    Interrogation is a difficult business. The people who you want information from do not wish to tell you, so what do you do? Some think water-boarding or other tortures will get you what you want, but this isn't true. They will simply give you false information, if any at all is given.

    Posted by: CreepyRandy47
  • I oppose the use of enhanced interrogation methods because it does not provide useful information.

    Not only are enhanced interrogation methods wrong from a moral standpoint, it has been shown that most of the information gathered through these techniques is wrong or inaccurate. When being questioned under duress people will say or confess to what they believe the questioner is wanting to hear in an attempt to make it stop. One need only look at the confessions given during the Spanish Inquisition or the Salem Witch Trials to see the results of enhanced interrogations.

    Posted by: N4th4Kenka
  • I disagree that enhanced interrogation techniques are effective in soliciting national security-related information.

    There are many reasons why. One being that in the past when enhanced techniques were used, terrorists were killed and maimed in brutal ways. The biggest reason being that the terrorist can't know what direction that others are moving in because they're radical. You get no information that is solid. Its very simple, work on security measures taken for workers within the government and police and border patrols doing a better job looking out for anything that is considered to be dangerous.

    Posted by: D4rrLatina
  • I do not think we have fully mastered the proper techniques in interrogation, are security is still at risk.

    Methods of interrogation should always change with security needs. We should never become comfortable with our levels. There should be a constant need foe security and protection. If a method needs revision we should be working on the improvement. We should strive to build a better more efficient plan of action.

    Posted by: C0ImEIite
  • Enhanced interrogation techniques provide just as much of an incentive to tell false information than to tell true information.

    Imagine you're being interrogated in an enhanced way - to remove the euphemistic language, you're being tortured. Your interrogator is asking you for the location of a terrorist cell in Yemen that he thinks you're associated with. But you don't know where the terrorist cell is - in fact, you have no idea what he's talking about. Every time you tell your interrogator that you don't know the answers to his questions, he simply continues the torture. At this point, you have great incentive to tell your interrogator something - your self-preservational instinct demands it. So you lie to him. Torture only provides an incentive to give information - it doesn't provide an incentive to give true information.

    Posted by: A Bass

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.