The CIA and FBI agents who testified about torture said it doesn't work. Intelligent interrogation gets information so much faster than torture. Not only that, there are massive moral and legal problems with it as well.
"was" justified... is this ever or a specific case?
The problem I find with some torture is that they keep going until they get the information they want rather than the right information. solitary confinement is certainly not justified though cos it is terrible what it can do to the mind.
But what if that information is wrong? If I think smeone has been treasonous when I torture them and they deny it am I: A. gonna accept it as the truth, or B. Torture them more till they admit it. If they weren't plotting anything treasonous their either gonna die through torture or admit it and, probably, be executed. (I'm not sure what country I'm in here England donesn't have the death penalty so Im' just makin that bit up) What chance does the prisoner have of accepting they were wrong and releasing them etc.
The CIA and FBI agents who testified about torture said it doesn't work. Intelligent interrogation gets information so much faster than torture. Not only that, there are massive moral and legal problems with it as well.
There is evidence that torture only works on certain personality types, not that intelligent interrogation is more effective all of the time.
I think in certain situations it is justified, however until it is legal whisking people away to 3rd world countries should not be happening. Be transparent about it, or don't do it at all.
Let's be honest, if I was tortured several times, I would admit to anything to make it stop. That would lead to false information and false leads. And even if I knew anything, why would I give that info to people who are torturing me?
Let's be honest, if I was tortured several times, I would admit to anything to make it stop. That would lead to false information and false leads. And even if I knew anything, why would I give that info to people who are torturing me?
There are many other ways to go about torturing someone. It is now generally accepted by most intelligence services that the infliction of pain is not particularly effective, rather the fear of the pain itself. Michael Kobui, the formed chief interrorgator for Israel's General Security Services is considered the master interrorgator. He said that only in rare instances did he use force to extract information from his subjects; in most cases it wasn't necessary. Trickery and charm are the interrogators best weapons, but the way this trickery is carried out would be seen by many as torture.
well, unless you can see into someone's mind, torture or the rumored "truth serum" (which i don't even think exists) are the only ways to get information. however, that doesn't justify torture, but it does show how easily we have to resort to violence because of inferior technology (by that i mean inferior technology that doesn't get us information we want.) humans are like this, you either have something that makes it easier to get something, or if they don't they use violence to get it.
people would end up making stuff up just to get out of the torture.
In Guantanamo Bay there is a simple yet effective system to stop this from happening. If you give false informattion you are treated worse, if you give good information you are rewarded. Inmates quickly learn to give correct information.
