what is torture

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is an underdiscussed point in regards to torture. Torture, or even enhanced interogation will obviously lead to bogus conffessions.

[/ QUOTE ]

You raise a correct observation, but it actually cuts in FAVOR of torture. Coerced confessions in the law enforcement context are prohibited precisely because they lead to wrongful convictions. This is basically the Supreme Court's reasoning for excluding so-called "coerced" statements.

In the intelligence/anti-terrorism context, the risk of a "wrongful confession" is much less important, because securing a criminal conviction is not the purpose of the interrogation. The purpose of the interrogation is to obtain actionable intelligence. In the intelligence context, you should be less concerned about "punishing an innocent man" and more concerned about "obtaining information that can be acted upon to prevent terrorism."

Thus, while torture in the law enforcement context is an abomination, it should be a necessary tool in the anti-terrorism context.

[BCPVP]

I've been thinking about torture w/ regards to the 8th amendment. Is the 8th amendment used as proof that we can't/shouldn't torture in the intelligence context? That would seem incorrect because the purpose of such torture isn't to punish, but to glean information.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this is an underdiscussed point in regards to torture. Torture, or even enhanced interogation will obviously lead to bogus conffessions.

[/ QUOTE ]

You raise a correct observation, but it actually cuts in FAVOR of torture. Coerced confessions in the law enforcement context are prohibited precisely because they lead to wrongful convictions. This is basically the Supreme Court's reasoning for excluding so-called "coerced" statements.

In the intelligence/anti-terrorism context, the risk of a "wrongful confession" is much less important, because securing a criminal conviction is not the purpose of the interrogation. The purpose of the interrogation is to obtain actionable intelligence. In the intelligence context, you should be less concerned about "punishing an innocent man" and more concerned about "obtaining information that can be acted upon to prevent terrorism."

Thus, while torture in the law enforcement context is an abomination, it should be a necessary tool in the anti-terrorism context.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me get this straight. The danger of false information "cuts in FAVOR" of torture because we're looking for actionable infomation?? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been thinking about torture w/ regards to the 8th amendment. Is the 8th amendment used as proof that we can't/shouldn't torture in the intelligence context?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no.

[InchoateHand]

Listening to right wing morons?

[masse75]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this is an underdiscussed point in regards to torture. Torture, or even enhanced interogation will obviously lead to bogus conffessions.

[/ QUOTE ]

You raise a correct observation, but it actually cuts in FAVOR of torture. Coerced confessions in the law enforcement context are prohibited precisely because they lead to wrongful convictions. This is basically the Supreme Court's reasoning for excluding so-called "coerced" statements.

In the intelligence/anti-terrorism context, the risk of a "wrongful confession" is much less important, because securing a criminal conviction is not the purpose of the interrogation. The purpose of the interrogation is to obtain actionable intelligence. In the intelligence context, you should be less concerned about "punishing an innocent man" and more concerned about "obtaining information that can be acted upon to prevent terrorism."

Thus, while torture in the law enforcement context is an abomination, it should be a necessary tool in the anti-terrorism context.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me get this straight. The danger of false information "cuts in FAVOR" of torture because we're looking for actionable infomation?? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, Elliot. I didn't follow his logic either. Saved me a long post.

[Bjorn]

I find it interesting that no one has mentioned that the use of "questionable" and potentially cruel techniques for interogation are quite detrimental to the psychological wellbeing of the person carying out as well as to the person on the reciving end.

After using said "enhanced interogation techniques" on prisoners for a while I think it would be quite common for the person using them not to start sliding down his or her sloping moral plane towards behaviours that are even more unseemly. This risk would also most likely be increased under stressful circumstances like beeing in combat conditions for an extended piece of time.

Use of "torture" or other "atrocities" is also in general quite harmfull to the morale of the organisation carying it out.

/Bjorn

If I had a son, daughter, ,loved one, kidnapped and was able to apprehend one of the accomplices, I would do everything in my power, short of killing him(because then hes of no use) to find out where they took said loved ones. Torture, you better believe it. I have to believe the majority of posters on this site if confronted with that situation would do the same. Torture or the threat of it has to be left on the table when interrogating believed terrorists. I dont think most Americans realize that Al quada, etc, if giving the opportunity would walk into your home and slice your throat, your newborns throat, everyones throat. We cant sit back and take a reactive position, we have to become proactive in these matters.

What if we caught a terrorist who we believed had info. on a dirty, nuclear, bomb on its way to America. Do we do nothing and hope for the best?? The stakes are to high my friends. The protection of American lives are paramount.