|
Well, flstf, I understand will's point about the efficacy of torture, or lack thereof. I also understand that in your theoretical window, there isn't much time for bonding or positive reinforcement. This isn't really my main point on the topic of the thread, but I'd like to point out that there is a difference between what happens off the records, and what is official policy of our society. In your case, if you personally decided you don't have time for this shit - your daughter is about to die - and you decided to starting beating the bejusus out of this hypothetical child killer, I personally couldn't blame you. Maybe a cop does it for you; he has children of his own, and he wants to keep your girl alive. I can see that - I can't condone it, but I can see it. I might do the same thing. Here's the catch; in that situation, if I decided to start wailing on the fucker, or waterboard him, or drag him behind my car or whatever - I would implicitly be ready to accept the consequences. Sure, I might try to get out of them, but I wouldn't be surprised when I was prosecuted for it. I'd probably go for temporary insanity, and maybe I'd get a reduced sentence.
That's different from an organized policy directed from top levels of administration, who are responsible for setting the tone of how interrogations are conducted. If you set the bar at borderline torture, or farther at 'holy shit that's torture,' what do you think is happening that isn't set down on paper?
I don't think you can set up torture as the official policy of your interrogation techniques, and expect not to be hit with human rights violations. I'm sure that it will sometimes happen, regardless - but in those cases the people involved shouldn't have instruction to do so, and they should be ready to take the hit if caught.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|