SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lou Weed who wrote (190386)6/28/2006 2:22:16 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
depriving him of sleep while strapping electrodes to his testicles are two entirely different matters.

I would definitely concur. However, permitting the detainee to PERCEIVE that he's about to be electrocuted (with electrical leads taped to his "package") should be enough.. I would hope the interrogator would not stoop to actually using electricity. The detainee will never know when it's a ruse, or when it might be real. And this uncertainty can weaken resolve.

Remember, the minute the prisoner is certain that no harm is going to befall him, the more difficult it will be to extract needed information from him.

The key to interrogation is finding the weakness in the detainees psyche. For some it might be fear of physical pain (if not the actual application of it). For others it might be love of family and the thought that they will not see their families again (or for a long time)...

And one more thing you might take into consideration. Because these people are illegal combatants, with no discernable uniforms or identification documents associating them with a military, or organized resistance, they are technically SPIES and SABOTEURS and subject to execution.

Most of them are pretty lucky that they are merely held in detention considering the crimes they've committed.

so I can assume that anything up to but not including crippling or death you would deem as acceptable? Interesting......

No... that would be a mistake. I'm not "black and white" on the issue, and I thought I had made that clear.

I don't advocate the use of physical interrogation methods as a norm. But neither am I content to utterly abolish such methods, especially in circumstances that might warrant it (leader with direct knowledge of a upcoming attack).

There's a REASON that this issue MUST remain ambiguous, and no options removed from the table.

Because the enemy is watching. And the minute they are certain they will not face certain interrogation methods, it provides them a major psychological comfort in developing the ability to resist non-physical methods.

Again.. when your children know that the worst punishment they will suffer is a "good talking to", they stand a greater chance of becoming uncontrollable and rebellious.

When a terrorist knows his enemy is forbidden from physically harming him, his whole psychological state is altered.

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext