Quote:
Originally Posted by manasecret
The same way they've done it for decades - without torture. Good-cop, bad-cop (or good-soldier, bad-soldier, if you prefer). Just look at the Army Field Manual you provided yourself. Trying to extract information from someone who doesn't want to give it is nothing new.
My guess is you have an agenda with this thread, so get with it already.  |
You do know that during WW2 many of our GI's were trained on how to interrogate using the battery of their field telephones, right?
But beyond this, you do good cop bad cop, and they don't give up the information as many simple criminals don't when interrogated using those methods, especially if they must be goven ample amounts of sleep and comfortable living conditions (our own accused criminals often don't get that). Then what?
My agenda is that there needs to be an answer to a real situtation, not simply a criticism. Getting rid of enhanced interrogation techniques does not sudden erase the problem that existing techniques were not working. So if you remove certain techniques, how then do you get the information you need if approved techniques don't work?