?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Writer's Block

Controversial Interrogation Techniques

Do you think controversial interrogation techniques should be used to get key intelligence from alleged terrorists? When, if at all, could it go too far?

Answers (106)

  • Okay, I'll say this, and only this.

    If someone has the guts to bomb the living daylights out of the United States on September 11th, then we should be able to use any tactics necessary to get information on further planned attacks in order to protect the people of our country!

    That's how I feel about it.

    And if you don't like it...go fly a kite!

    Good Lord!  Have we already forgotten how much damage happened on September 11th?  *shakes head in disapproval*



  • The Geneva Convention was put in place for a reason. Is it just okay for the United States to do the tortue? If so, why? What separates us from the "alleged" terrorists if that is the case?
  • Of course! It could never "go too far." The bloodier, the better. That's my motto.

    Peace and Love,
    Brewster


  • Boy! this is something i can get my hands behind. In my opinion Interrogation is what it is, Forcefully obtaining information. And in my mind, You can never push the limits on obtaining information. Terrorist groups, Mostly ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, Have soldiers who push the interrogation process to far, In one instance of a downed Special Air Service member i read about, His interrogators made him eat his own waste, And from generally, 3:00-5:00 he was brutally beaten, All to obtain information on where the rest of his team was. The British S.A.S soldiers are trained to withhold any and all information, And the man in that story did so under ridiculous circumstances. So I think it is a good idea to push the limits of interrogation, It doesn't matter if we push the boarders of torture, I think if it's a matter of national security than by all means we should be able to do anything to obtain said information. Especially if it's on a upcoming attack. But most soldiers take there information to the grave, And that's why i think we should push the limits. Because if the soldier believes in what he's fighting for, He won't spill a word.


  • How can you count on the veracity of something obtained through coersion? 

    Even at our best the information we give others is tinged by our personal bias.  How much more, when that information is not given through free-will, but from the competing desires between preserving one's body and life and the desire to preserve one's integrity and loyalty? 
  • Nope, we shouldn't use "controversial interrogation techniques," code words for torture, at all. I can't justify lowering myself to that level. I'd rather be killed by a terrorist than act like one.
  • "you can't talk peace and have a gun"
  • Torture, threatening the person being interrogated with the loss of people they love, and/or any physical injury are all going too far.  If at all possible, it would be better to get the information from covert methods, instead of by directly questioning the alleged terrorists, but I admit that is not always feasible.  So, when it's not feasible, and you've got an alleged terrorist captured, sit 'em down, tie 'em up, and employ all of the psychology you have at your disposal, but DO NOT PHYSICALLY HARM THE PERSON.  And try not to get so into the psychological aspect that the questionee goes insane either.



  • WOW !
Previous
← Ctrl ← Alt
Next
Ctrl → Alt →