|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:05PM
#1161
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2008
|
Are you even listening to yourself? How can you even say that based on what I've just said. There's nothing delusional with using a tactic to teach the victim not to lie because he can't be sure what you know and what you don't, but IS sure that if he's caught it will be bad AND using the same tactic to reward the victim with time away from the pain if he tells the truth. This is a sound method.
Um, if you've even been paying half attention to my posts, you know that he is NOT innocent of the initial things that are being asked. The truth on those is known. That's why much of the initial time is spent on things already known., so that we can teach him that truth is better than a lie. You don't just tell someone they're lying if you don't know it's a lie. That just destroys what you're trying to accomplish.
Again, you prove that you're paying at best, half attention to what I'm saying before you respond. I'll try again. THERE IS NO TIME TO BEFRIEND HIM. That and you've absolutely no proof of your claim that it is impossible to get reliable information through torture.
Ill say this again. In intel work you are never under that kind of time pressure. Torture is a waste of time and effort if you have the sources to verify it then you do not need it. The people most likely to have sensitive data will be trained in resisting torture. To get useful info from such an individual even using harsh interagation methods would take days.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:16PM
#1162
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Ill say this again. In intel work you are never under that kind of time pressure.
Bull. It may not happen often, but sometimes information comes to the table that is very time sensitive.
Torture is a waste of time and effort if you have the sources to verify it then you do not need it.
Re-read my last post.
The people most likely to have sensitive data will be trained in resisting torture. To get useful info from such an individual even using harsh interagation methods would take days.
Perhaps, perhaps not. If the situation is time sensitive, you cannot take the chance that he might be trained to resist. You do what you have to do to maximize your chances of saving lives.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:18PM
#1163
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2008
|
No. If you have bits and pieces that you cannot connect, but can be used along with the information recieved via torture to create a clear or semi-clear picture that will save lives, AND you don't have time to get the infomation another way, torture is the way to go.
Ah yes, the old ticking time bomb scenario. You'd think these kinds of things happen everyday given how often torture apologists trot out the possibility.
Things aren't always going to be you pretty little picture that you've set up in your post.
Things are very rarely going to resemble an episode of 24.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:24PM
#1164
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2008
|
Bull. It may not happen often, but sometimes information comes to the table that is very time sensitive.
Re-read my last post.
Perhaps, perhaps not. If the situation is time sensitive, you cannot take the chance that he might be trained to resist. You do what you have to do to maximize your chances of saving lives.
And torture does not do that. Look if you are known to use torture people are less likely to trust you. You get more information from people willingly turning over information then from torture. Using torture reduces the chances that people will willingly come forward, thus in the long term torture hurts your chances. And time sensitive information does not happen all that often. When a big bust comes, or terrorist cell is destroyed its the work of patient data collection which usually does not include torture. Ive worked intelligence I was stationed at NSA for 2 years. I know what Im talking about.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:40PM
#1165
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Look if you are known to use torture people are less likely to trust you.
Which is why it's so rare that it happens. I'm not advocating torture as common thing.
You get more information from people willingly turning over information then from torture.
I never claimed otherwise.
Using torture reduces the chances that people will willingly come forward, thus in the long term torture hurts your chances.
Not if it happens as rarely is I'm saying.
And time sensitive information does not happen all that often.
That's what I said.
When a big bust comes, or terrorist cell is destroyed its the work of patient data collection which usually does not include torture.
Almost always, yes. I never claimed otherwise.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 3:57PM
#1166
|
|
|
If you have enough information to make torture seem like a reliable method for extracting information, then you have enough information to not have any reason to rely on torture. If you have anything less than corroborating data, information gained from torture is unreliable. If you have corroborating data, torture is unconscionable.
I have to agree with this.
Torture is the fastest way to get someone to agree with you. But as a reliable method of abstracting useful information, it registers on the low end of usefulness. You can't be certain that the tortured is telling the truth, telling you want you want to hear or just plain telling all that they know (which, more often than not, is useless).
I suppose it's a good way to pass the time.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 4:24PM
#1167
|
|
|
I've removed content from this thread because trolling is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 4:29PM
#1168
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
I have to agree with this.
Torture is the fastest way to get someone to agree with you. But as a reliable method of abstracting useful information, it registers on the low end of usefulness. You can't be certain that the tortured is telling the truth, telling you want you want to hear or just plain telling all that they know (which, more often than not, is useless).
I suppose it's a good way to pass the time.
I definately agree with you that it registers on the low end of usefulness.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2009 - 5:04PM
#1169
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
It is a very well known fact that torture is NOT an effective means of information-gathering. If you torture someone long enough, they'll tell you anything to make you stop. If they don't actually know the answer to your question, they'll make something up.
I think it was in the movie Reservoir Dogs, when Mr. Whoever was torturing the cop he had brought to the warehouse in his trunk. The boss's son show's up and is furious at Mr. Whoever, and tells him something along the lines of: "You torture him long enough and he'll tell you he started the F-in Chicago fire, but that don't make it neccessarily F-in so".
Will you get answers? Yep. Will you get info? Yep. Will it be true answers or info? Not neccessarily. Will they say whatever they think you want to hear to make you stop? You bet they will.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
