What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
437 Comments
- tynos, on 04/23/2009, -21/+150FTA:
"Most law enforcement experts regard torture as unproductive. It is a central pillar of law that testimony obtained through coercion is inadmissible. In his new book How to Break a Terrorist, Mathew Alexander, a former US army interrogator, argues from personal experience that non-violent interrogation is much the most effective method of extracting useful intelligence."
See also:
Detainee's Harsh Treatment Foiled No Plots
http://tinyurl.com/dm2llf
Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime
By Judge Evan Wallach
http://tinyurl.com/22vvrc
DOJ Prosecuted Texas Sheriff in 1983 For Waterboarding Prisoners
http://tinyurl.com/d5w6et
5 Myths About Torture and Truth
Myth 3 contradicts this Macintyre 's " People will say anything under torture" argument
http://tinyurl.com/2nfg4h - Mossman85, on 04/24/2009, -9/+96"TELL ME WHERE THE ______ IS!!"
-Jack Bauer - HAL90000, on 04/24/2009, -13/+80Last episode was especially lulzy:
FBI Agent: "We're having a little trouble, people don't like the idea of their homes being searched at 2:30AM without a warrant"
Leading character: "I'm trying to keep them safe, not worry about their rights!"
Yes, keep them safe from the terrorists. The terrorists who hate us for our...uh...oh *****.
I guess the plan is to take those freedoms away so the terrorists won't hate us anymore. - pronabol, on 04/24/2009, -12/+72My brother once hid my Gameboy, twisted his arm up his back, he told me where it was.
- anarchist101, on 04/24/2009, -27/+81The only people who believe that torture "works" are the sadists and psychopaths like Cheney and Bush and whomever else willingly engaged in it or ordered it done.
- iDoraemon, on 04/24/2009, -19/+59Jack Bauer will always be real to me...
- fugazied, on 04/24/2009, -19/+56Funny how much Fox news is no the side of torture and not investigating the legality of what the Bush administration authorized. I saw part of Hannity today, he refused to accept that anyone had called waterboarding torture, rather 'enhanced interrogation techniques' that were fine. O'Reilly says that since we bombed Hiroshima and Dresden, then we should be allowed to torture today. He managed to pull out the argument that 'well in times of war you gotta do what ya gotta do'. So he's an advocate for war crimes now.
- idavidtang, on 04/24/2009, -1/+38Toilet?
- sheeplescareme, on 04/23/2009, -25/+59torture is wrong, end of story.
if the article is accurate as to the plot of that show, i am once grateful i've not had a telly in years - it sounds like complete rubbish. - lewystud, on 04/24/2009, -9/+43I must have heard this 'ticking nuke' argument being rehashed and repeated 10 times in the news over the last few days
- MadN, on 04/24/2009, -10/+44I do not care if torture worked.
If we give our ideals the terrorists and tyrants have already succeeded.
When we lower ourselves to that level, I no longer want to "win".
The reason we won the first Gulf War so fast was our enemies trusted us, even better than they trusted their officers and even themselves. Let's look at the choices:
First, would you rather be a dead solder or a well fed, and safe POW?
Next, would you rather be a dead solder or a raped and tortured POW?
We are now seeing the result of enemies who would rather die fighting than be captured. - manosinistra, on 04/24/2009, -10/+41The Gestapo employed verschärfte Vernehmung - “enhanced interrogation techniques”, the term favoured by the Bush Administration!
No need to make comparisons, they chose their references all by themselves... - scantron27, on 04/24/2009, -4/+34The argument isn't really that torture doesn't work, but rather that it's immoral. I mean we could just launch a bunch of nukes at Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc to get rid of terrorists, but we're not doing so because it's wrong.
- smotpoker, on 04/24/2009, -1/+30hahaha, id like to see you keep telling the truth if you know it will lead to more waterboarding!!
- Ragzouken, on 04/24/2009, -2/+29"Quit being a pansy, ***** happens." What are you trying to say here? It's okay for completely unethical behaviour, because "***** happens"? If I rape your mother and slay your first born are you going to be okay with that because "***** happens"? Or maybe you'll get upset because you're a "pansy".
- Renian, on 04/24/2009, -3/+26FTA: “Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles... He saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Are you going to convict Jack Bauer?”
Captain Picard! Could you come in here real quick and look completely ***** dumbstruck? - viserov, on 04/24/2009, -5/+28story line
- CrazyChair, on 04/24/2009, -4/+27............................................________
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,
.........................,/...............................................”:,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:”........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../
...,,,___.`~,......“~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_..........._,-%.......`
..................................., - Angostura, on 04/24/2009, -2/+25akphidelt A question for you. You say that you are not a member of a terrorist organisation.
How long would you keep to that story if you were being waterboarded and your interrogators did not accept that answer? Seriously.
That's (one of) the problems with torture. - kd420, on 04/24/2009, -1/+23And if he didn't hide your Gameboy, would the same technique have worked?
- CrazyChair, on 04/24/2009, -5/+27It's sad that "24" is probably what most of the pro-torture crowd thinks, when it comes to how it works.
"The use of torture was a dramatic device used to show urgency, not meant to validate this kind of behavior for the real world... In reality less than 10 percent of information they get from situations like this are helpful, but it is a television show and we are driving a plot forward and we use it for dramatic effect. But it does raise question of right and wrong... From my perspective it has always been literally a dramatic device to show you the urgency of a situation. There was just no alternative. One of the most moving scenes for me was killing my boss — we’re not condoning that, it was just part of the show. It’s as simple as that."
- Kiefer Sutherland on "24" - amishdigger, on 04/24/2009, -13/+32Torture works well to get "confessions" of crimes that never really happened. Great for "fiction".
I always tell those people who defend torture and speak from a comfortable position about how torture is "cool" and it's part of being "tough" and so on... I tell them , what if you were suspected by the CIA of being a terrorist, and what if they would start pulling your teeth out one by one, slowly and painfully, and they wouldn't stop until you "confess" because after all, they "know" you are a terrorist. I'd bet they would be confessing a fairytale beyond imagination before they give up even a single teeth of theirs. - thatoneguydunno, on 04/24/2009, -6/+25What? It works every time! Eventually they'll understand what you want them to say, and tell you what you want to hear.
It's like saying "Fsck the truth, tell me what I WANT".
And the fact that some people make decisions based on information gathered this way is just ridiculous. - draculthemad, on 04/24/2009, -3/+21Except it doesn't work that way. Full stop.
It has been repeatedly proven that someone under torture will just make up more and more pleasing lies to make it stop.
Its just the paradox of the false positive all over again. Everyone you torture is going to confess all sorts of ticking bombs. Any hope you have of catching one in the act would just be drowned out by the number of false positives.
You only have so many agents to run down tips after all.
So what if you narrow down your criteria for beginning torture till you have some other reasonable information to indicate that someone is worth the torture? Then you are generally just better of sticking to traditional investigation techniques, they will produce better results quicker since you've already done most of the work. You already know where the suspect hangs out, shops, works etc. - ozborn, on 04/24/2009, -2/+16No one gave you the cold argument you seem to need so here it is.
Even ignoring morality, torture does NOT work as an intelligence or military policy. For torture to "work" in an immoral sense for a single questioning it must:
1) Consume less resources than it expends
2) Provide actionable intelligence
3) Be more effective than questioning not involving torture
I doubt we have hard figures on what the % of interrogations fit this pattern but I would guess far less than 1 %. Once one considers that torture as a policy will entice your enemies to fight harder (to the death perhaps to avoid torture), set back your political goals since the vast majority of the population finds torture reprehensible, waste countless resources building secret prisons, torturing people who would have co-operated without torture, training people in torturer techniques, expending resources to try to coverup the torture and torture facilities, following up erroneous leads from torture sessions you can see why torture is a failure on every level.
Your argument:
"if it didn't work it wouldn't be so widely practiced" could be used to defend the medical practice of bleeding. The reason why torture is still practiced is complicated, but probably factors include:
1)The desire of the government terrorize its population or enemies to better control them
2)Because they think it works
3)The human brain when dealing with a threat wants to lash out and torture seems like a natural expression.
Also your other argument:
"I'll point out that the people doing it for a VERY long time while frequently sadists would not have been keep in employment if they did not deliver reliable intelligence"
This is not the case at all. Even if it didn't work they would be kept under employment to ensure a better cover-up. Plus, it is generally the people doing the torturing who are evaluating how effective it is. Are you really saying there are no incompetent people or useless departments in government?
Your last point about getting the effect of torture without torture has more strength I think. I believe British policy in WW2 with spies was to simply tell them they would be executed (but not tortured) if they did not co-operate.
As others have pointed out but I am too lazy to search for, there are many articles out there pointing out that torture doesn't work (recent one on salon) but you'll have to google them yourself. - DankBuddz, on 04/24/2009, -0/+14"Quit being a pansy, ***** happens."
And that's why you will never be in charge of anything important. Because you're ***** retarded.
"100% for torture, what ever means are nessary."
Even though its been proven to be more of a hindrance than anything else, lead soldiers on wild goose chases putting them in harms way, wasting time and resources? Okay, good opinion! People like you don't even know what you're arguing about anymore. - Renian, on 04/24/2009, -0/+14Thanks, Captain.
- sullenbode, on 04/23/2009, -6/+20I've been bitching about that show for years. And yes, the show also depicts the necessity of torturing employees of the CTU (counter terrorism unit) themselves.
"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY&NR= ... - inactive, on 04/24/2009, -1/+14How is it not immoral?
- KimmyGibbler, on 04/24/2009, -0/+13Lube?
- inactive, on 04/24/2009, -6/+19There have been no terrorist attacks in United States since Jack Bauer has appeared on television.
- scheibs14, on 04/24/2009, -0/+13clitoris?
- badenglishihave, on 04/24/2009, -0/+13FACT: innocent people are never tortured.
...
I really hope you're laughing right now. - Dipsomaniac, on 04/24/2009, -3/+16Rational argument?
It's counterproductive, since it produces far less usable information than other interrogation techniques that don't break the law; it's dangerous, since it makes your enemies more likely to use it; it's stupid, since it often makes your intelligence source useless for further questioning.
All rational arguments. I notice that YOUR argument don't stick to rationality, though - you're already indulging yourself in the "They're evil, so it's okay for us to be evil" fallacy. So is pretty much everybody else supporting torture. That's simply an irrational desire for vengeance.
And your "if it didn't work it wouldn't be so widely practiced" statement is so naive that it hurts. - 4verageJo3, on 04/24/2009, -13/+25I wish this were true, but unfortunately it's not.
Torture (and interrogation techniqes that fall short of torture, to a lesser extent) may not work for the pure sadist, but it does work for the 'professional' interrogator because the pain/discomfort is not applied randomly, but in the same manner as ordinary Pavlovian/Operant Conditioning (keep in mind that many US interrogators will not know this, because most are held accountable to the Geneva Convention. You pretty much have to study foreign accounts to understand how true the following is).
In an ideal situation, the interrogation begins with a number of questions that the subject will be uncomfortable answering, but that the interrogator already knows the answers to. But the subject doesn't know what the interrogater does and doesn't already know.
Truthful responses are met with sublte rewards, such as a calm, stable environment or even candy, cigarrettes, etc., if the subject starts acting cooperatively. Deceptive responses are met with gradually increasing 'punishments' of discomfort and/or pain, until the subject turns truthful again.
Eventually, the suspect begins to rationalize that the interrogator knows what he's holding back anyway, and the pain simply isn't worth it. The responses become reliably truthful, and then the real interrogation begins. Answers are checked through multiple, independent sources wherever possible, and any regression to a deceptive state is swiftly 'punished' until the subject begins telling the truth again. - Endrian, on 04/24/2009, -3/+15Burn Notice got it right.
- DankBuddz, on 04/24/2009, -1/+12Huh, whenever I'm tortured by my-mother-in law, I tell her what she wants to hear, not the truth...
wait... - monkeythumpa, on 04/24/2009, -0/+11Who cares if torture works or doesn't work? Americans shouldn't torture BECAUSE IT IS TORTURE.
- uberduger, on 04/24/2009, -5/+15Dugg for making sense.
- weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -0/+10akphidelt - turns out another chapter of your frat just bombed a church, and the govt is investigating all other chapters for domestic terrorism. they KNOW you're involved, so you better stop saying you have no idea what they're talking about, or they're going to cut your fingers off one at a time.
I think you talk after the first finger is cut off... whether it's the names of offensive linemen you toss out there, or the little boys you dream about. - flashcat7777, on 04/24/2009, -1/+11That's because Jack *knows* when someone is lying. His is the only case where torture should be legal.
- Redzin, on 04/24/2009, -2/+11@Mike17102
And those of us with brains feel ashamed to be of the same species as you. - Ragzouken, on 04/24/2009, -0/+9Digg is a US site with a majority of US users. The United States is a Liberal Democracy, so you'll just have to put up with people with Liberal views. Also I think you'll find that it's not that everyone is repeating each other, but that people are independently coming to the same conclusions because those conclusions are rational.
- aletoledo, on 04/24/2009, -1/+10The part you don't understand is that we don't know who has useful information. We have to torture hundreds of people in order to find one person that happens to know the secret we're looking for. You might think that government agents can somehow pick the right people to torture, but thats not really the case. They have to torture the innocent (or people that have nothing useful if you prefer) to get to the people that are guilty.
- inactive, on 04/24/2009, -3/+12"the people doing it for a VERY long time while frequently sadists would not have been keep in employment if they did not deliver reliable intelligence"
Yes, because bureaucracy never employs people who perform useless functions. - DankBuddz, on 04/24/2009, -2/+11No idea why you're getting buried.
- DankBuddz, on 04/24/2009, -0/+9Don't ask him questions he can't answer, he doesn't plan on coming back here.
- DankBuddz, on 04/24/2009, -4/+13In the face of repeated observation, research, logic, reason, and consensus on an issue, gfryesc still disagrees due to his extremely large amount of knowledge and experience.
Thanks for the news, torture really DOES work. I'll go ahead and believe you along with all the other people who don't know what they're talking about, and have no actual facts or credible sources to back up their opinion.
Man, someday I hope I can have a set of beliefs based upon a system with no checks an balances, only warm fuzzy feelings inside! - edcro, on 04/24/2009, -0/+8The less we focus on whether torture "works" the better. The question is irrelevant.
I have no doubt that torture does "work" under certain, limited circumstances. I also have no doubt that setting up a security apparatus like the former East Germany's Stasi would "work" in terms of intercepting terrorist cells and preventing them from carrying out their plans. Should we do that, too, if we know it would save American lines?
The point is, and always has been, that we're supposed to be better than them. We were better than the Nazis not because we won, but because we gave fair trials to their leaders and offered the German people the opportunity to rejoin the world. It would have seemed easier and felt better had we humiliated, pillaged and plundered Germany. But we didn't. We don't always do things the easy way, and sometimes we pay a price for that. But we do things the right way, and in the long term it pays back in multiples. - sullenbode, on 04/24/2009, -2/+10DING DING DING We have a winner!!!!!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 448 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is