Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Greg700
During WW2 the Germans (and us as well) had the most luck with interrogators who used nonviolent approaches. However, it is absolutely possible to coerce people under the right circumstances. Additionally, the fear of torture as an option is a useful tool. When we capture someone, they are almost always absolutely terrified, and out of fear will tell us most of what we ask, particularly if we phrase the question right. After some time goes by and they realize that nothing is going to happen to them if they don't cooperate, they stop talking.
|
Every interrogation expert who's gone on record in the last five years disagrees with you. What are your credentials with which you back up the claim that torture or the fear of torture (which is a form of torture) produces reliable information?
"The use of force... yields unreliable results [and] may damage subsequent collection efforts". --2006 US Army Field Manual
Further, The United States is a signatory to five treaties or international declarations that ban torture:
- The U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
- Third Geneva Convention, Common Article 3 (1949)
- International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
- Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions (1977)
- Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984)
In each of these instances, we've given our word not to torture. To say that torture is EVER permissible is to say that the United States' word is meaningless. No amount of wordsmithing and lawyership can undo the damage it does to dishonor our word.