How do we interrogate?

[Tom]

Since we keep hearing the same old same old fro the left, lumping everything conveniently under the general umbrella of "torture," and assuming that our military and CIA are monsters, ripping the finger nails off everyone that gets caught, often just for fun, let's hear from the lefties - SPECIFICALLY - what interrogation techniques they would consider acceptable, considering the risk of not getting the information we need. How do you guys suggest we interrogate?

Give them the thread, let them tell us how they would keep us safe.


For a kick off point, my point of view is that is nothing I would not condone,
nothing. nothing you could think of, and I would not limit that to just the suspects...I would include their families if we have access to them.

I draw no line. Whatever it takes.

The premise - we just caught the architect of 9-11. We know it is him, we know he planned the attacked. We are pretty sure he has planned another and that it might be in motion as we bring him into Gitmo.
You are trained interrogation expert, and as part of your training, you yourself were water boarded.

What do you do?

[ArlJim78]

I would go farther than most. My torture would consist of forcing the detainees to watch a continous loop of The View for as long as it takes. 3-4 hours would break even the worst of them.

[HUSKER55]

shave their heads and beards off and force them to wear jeans and a t-shirt as we lead them to an anger management class to explain why they feel this way.

[jballscalls]

I thought torturing people was illegal? so aren't we not allowed to do it?

[Tom]

That is my point - what is allowed in interrogation?


But then again, is it torture if is not intended to harm, just gather information?

[jballscalls]

That is my pint - what is allowed in interrogation?

who knows. i do know that its scary that the president has the authority to decide who he wants to torture and what he wants to do to them. that means any of us are in danger, even if things are circumstantial.

I could be college roomates with a guy who ten years later blows up a building, and they are going to waterboard me because i say i dont know anything about his plots or him?? and then i lie and just give them the answer they want??

its tough because you might get some answers from torturing, but you may just get what you want to hear, even if its not the truth. hence why confessions under duress are not admissable in courts.

[chickenhead]

I know how we should interrogate....but you're gonna have to beat it out of me...

[exactaplayer]

This is a true story as told to me by a ww2 vet.
Near the end of the war he and another GI were captured by a German patrol. Upon being captured the commander of the Germans asked the second GI. "you got Panzers ?" the GI responded with his name rank and serial number. The GI was asked again "You got Panzers ?" again the GI responded with his name rank and serial number. The German commander then pulled his pistol and shot the GI in the head, killing him instantly. The commander then turned to my friend and asked "You got Panzers ?" My friend replied " hell yes we got Panzers over there, we got Panzers over there and we got Panzers over there." The commander struck my friend soundly along side the head with his pistol and continued on. My friend of course knew nothing about Panzers but did know what to say to stay alive. My friend eventually escaped but did recieve a rifle butt to the head or gonads at regular intervals during his three day captivity.

[ezrabrooks]

This is a true story as told to me by a ww2 vet.
Near the end of the war he and another GI were captured by a German patrol. Upon being captured the commander of the Germans asked the second GI. "you got Panzers ?" the GI responded with his name rank and serial number. The GI was asked again "You got Panzers ?" again the GI responded with his name rank and serial number. The German commander then pulled his pistol and shot the GI in the head, killing him instantly. The commander then turned to my friend and asked "You got Panzers ?" My friend replied " hell yes we got Panzers over there, we got Panzers over there and we got Panzers over there." The commander struck my friend soundly along side the head with his pistol and continued on. My friend of course knew nothing about Panzers but did know what to say to stay alive. My friend eventually escaped but did recieve a rifle butt to the head or gonads at regular intervals during his three day captivity.

Hey EP... War is Hell.. Is there a point to that story?

Ez

[hcap]

Torture will certainly get right wing radio guys to say anything...

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sportsprose/2009/05/mancow_gets_waterboarded.html


Ok, they also could be forced to read Toms' 35,000 posts. :D

[exactaplayer]

Hey EP... War is Hell.. Is there a point to that story?

Ez
Point to the story. under enough interrogation/pressure the captive will tell you what you want to here.
There are people with a lot more smarts in this area then the posters on this board or the right wing radio talk show dudes. Perhaps we should leave this decision to those folks. You know stick to the guidelines in the Army Field Manual regarding treatment of captives.

[Tom]

No one has addressed the point of this thread yet.

Torture is bad because yadda yadda yadda.....some old, same old.....come on guys......what IS ACCEPTABLE? Read post 1 and answer my question.

Like Obama said to the repubs...all you have done so far is be negative....time to step up tot plate and make a real suggestion.

Or hasn't the party line sent you your emails on how to respond? :rolleyes:
Lots of big talk over the months on why WB is bad, but not a single one able to step up to get specific?


Sec?

[Lefty]

Tom, the left will never respond, because they have hamstrung themselves, when they call waterboarding torture. I'm sure if they had a loved one at risk and they thought they could save that loved one by waterboarding the perp; they would have it done in a heartbeat.
So libs, your child's life is at stake; we know we have the guy who knows where the child is at. Waterboarding is an option. Would you do it? Be honest.

[jballscalls]

Tom, the left will never respond, because they have hamstrung themselves, when they call waterboarding torture. I'm sure if they had a loved one at risk and they thought they could save that loved one by waterboarding the perp; they would have it done in a heartbeat.
So libs, your child's life is at stake; we know we have the guy who knows where the child is at. Waterboarding is an option. Would you do it? Be honest.

since i've heard from expert military men such as John McCain and former Seal Jesse the body ventura that waterboarding usually wouldnt work to get information, i'd ask them to do something else to try and get the truth out of him. find his kids and threaten torture on them.

most of these guys are willing to die for there cause. but are they willing for their children to die for their cause?

[exactaplayer]

No one has addressed the point of this thread yet.

Torture is bad because yadda yadda yadda.....some old, same old.....come on guys......what IS ACCEPTABLE? Read post 1 and answer my question.

Like Obama said to the repubs...all you have done so far is be negative....time to step up tot plate and make a real suggestion.

Or hasn't the party line sent you your emails on how to respond? :rolleyes:
Lots of big talk over the months on why WB is bad, but not a single one able to step up to get specific?


Sec?
I thought my reply was a response to the point . Excessive torture gets bad results. Also suggested we abide by the Army field manual for handling captives, THIS IS ACCEPTABLE. Also suggested none here actually have the expertise on handling prisoners.

[Greyfox]

Have Helen Thomas kiss them until they beg for mercy.http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/helen.jpg.

[JustRalph]

all this talk about waterboarding is a damn joke. We do much worse things

and they work.............look into it..........

[Marshall Bennett]

That was torture just looking at her in your post , Grey .

[Warren Henry]

I think that checking history will show that we have always treated our prisoners better than our enemies have treated our citizens. Even if we have done some of the things claimed recently, it is still much more humane than recorded beheadings.

I don't believe in any form of mistreatment to a prisoner unless it will provide direct and immediate lessening of the danger to my country or my family. I would never maltreat a foot soldier who likely had no information of value. I would not mistreat a prisoner only for propaganda purposes. Revenge would never be a motive.

However, if I had a prisoner that I was reasonably sure had information that might affect the immediate welfare of my country or family, I would not hesitate to do whatever was necessary to obtain that information. I would be willing to go far beyond waterboarding.

[Tom]

Remember 9-11-2001?
Remember the two death pilots who were stopped by security at Logan Airport, but the jerk let them go in spite of it being a clear breach?

OK, I do not like what ifs, but this was so close - suppose they detained the two. Fast forward an hour or two, the towers have been hit, other planes are now suspected of being hijacked. You now think, rightfully, that we are under attack and no one knows the extent of it. You do know this - two possible terrorist are in your custody in Boston. Hundreds of planes are still up there and you have no idea how many more hits are planned. Now the first tower collapses....

What do you do?

1. Break out that old WWII field manual and blow off the dust
2. Start a thread about Cheney's military decisions 40 years ago
3. Sit back an hope no one else dies today
4. Whatever it takes to get information immediately

[jballscalls]

Remember 9-11-2001?
Remember the two death pilots who were stopped by security at Logan Airport, but the jerk let them go in spite of it being a clear breach?

OK, I do not like what ifs, but this was so close - suppose they detained the two. Fast forward an hour or two, the towers have been hit, other planes are now suspected of being hijacked. You now think, rightfully, that we are under attack and no one knows the extent of it. You do know this - two possible terrorist are in your custody in Boston. Hundreds of planes are still up there and you have no idea how many more hits are planned. Now the first tower collapses....

What do you do?

1. Break out that old WWII field manual and blow off the dust
2. Start a thread about Cheney's military decisions 40 years ago
3. Sit back an hope no one else dies today
4. Whatever it takes to get information immediately

He would do #2

[PaceAdvantage]

I thought my reply was a response to the point . Excessive torture gets bad results. Also suggested we abide by the Army field manual for handling captives, THIS IS ACCEPTABLE. Also suggested none here actually have the expertise on handling prisoners.According to the Army field manual we have to run the President for permission if we want to put both hands on the shoulders of a captive...

Excessive torture gets bad results...naturally, going easy on a captive will get no results...so Tom asks a good question...what does work? How do we interrogate and get results?

[Tom]

The silence so far is deafening. And telling.

Nice to take the high road and be judgmental, but when you have to really take a stand, no one steps forward.

[newtothegame]

Tom...it doesnt fall into their neat little tidy ( I don't want to get my hands dirty) manual of being a leftie. See the problem here is that if we get attacked and do nothing...they scream we should of done something. If we do something, they scream and say it is illegal. So you see ( as I am POSITIVE you already knew without me)...they want the cake...eat it too...screw up the country...and blame it on the right.

[Dick Schmidt]

Tom,


I know a fellow who interrogated suspects in Iraq during the first Gulf War and I discussed this with him on a couple of occasions. He agrees that information must be extracted, and quickly. He also agrees with those that say torture is just not reliable. They tell you what you want to hear, so any information you get can't be trusted, which makes it more or less useless. His solution? Chemical interrogation. Pump them full of certain mind altering drugs (he declines to say just which ones) and they babble like children, telling you anything you can ask in simple questions. Easy, reasonably safe (my friend had it tried on him), quick acting and few residuals (some people have flashbacks and those who really spill the beans may have a lot of guilt).

Works for me.

Dick


What if there were no hypothetical questions?

[PaceAdvantage]

Tom,


I know a fellow who interrogated suspects in Iraq during the first Gulf War and I discussed this with him on a couple of occasions. He agrees that information must be extracted, and quickly. He also agrees with those that say torture is just not reliable. They tell you what you want to hear, so any information you get can't be trusted, which makes it more or less useless. His solution? Chemical interrogation. Pump them full of certain mind altering drugs (he declines to say just which ones) and they babble like children, telling you anything you can ask in simple questions. Easy, reasonably safe (my friend had it tried on him), quick acting and few residuals (some people have flashbacks and those who really spill the beans may have a lot of guilt).

Works for me.

Dick


What if there were no hypothetical questions? Works for me too...is this outlawed by the Geneva Conventions?

Something tells me it must be, as this type of solution is way too simple and easy.

Why go through all the trouble of water boarding or whatever when you can simply go to the needle?

[Warren Henry]

Tom,


I know a fellow who interrogated suspects in Iraq during the first Gulf War and I discussed this with him on a couple of occasions. He agrees that information must be extracted, and quickly. He also agrees with those that say torture is just not reliable. They tell you what you want to hear, so any information you get can't be trusted, which makes it more or less useless. His solution? Chemical interrogation. Pump them full of certain mind altering drugs (he declines to say just which ones) and they babble like children, telling you anything you can ask in simple questions. Easy, reasonably safe (my friend had it tried on him), quick acting and few residuals (some people have flashbacks and those who really spill the beans may have a lot of guilt).

Works for me.

Dick


What if there were no hypothetical questions?

Seems like a good idea to me. Probably easier and more reliable than electrodes to the gonads which would have been my first choice.

[HUSKER55]

If we would tell our soldiers to not take prisoners we would not have to deal with this problem.

Have you ever wondered how many of our leaders have military experience and how many have actually had to "meet the enemy"?

and we wonder where these policies come from.

[Greyfox]

Hypothesis: The person that is captured is the least likely to know what is going on.

[Lefty]

A wrong hypothisis when it comes to leaders. We waterboarded 3, it saved lives and the libs don't like it.

[JustRalph]

Works for me too...is this outlawed by the Geneva Conventions?

The Geneva Conventions don't apply to terrorists.

Only combatants wearing the uniform of a country they are fighting for

[PaceAdvantage]

The Geneva Conventions don't apply to terrorists.

Only combatants wearing the uniform of a country they are fighting forAwww come on now JR...what are you trying to do? Start another common sense "letter of the law" type of battle? :lol: