Because there are some pragmatists who are still open to arguments about whether torture (or, to use the current euphemism, “enhanced interrogation techniques”) can be effective, I thought it was worth highlighting this article by Barry Ritholtz. As Ritholtz notes, “Virtually all of the top interrogation experts – both conservatives and liberals (except for those trying to escape war crimes prosecution) say that torture doesn’t work.”
This claim won’t come as a surprise to anyone who has closely followed this debate and is aware that the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and CIA have all said that torture doesn’t work and should not be used. But for those who are just now researching the issue, Ritholtz’s article contains dozens of links that help explain why utilitarians, pragmatists, and other potential torture advocates should reconsider their support of the practice.
(Via: Mark Shea)
May 16th, 2011 | 1:14 pm
The primary source of Joe’s post is not the financial blogger, Ritholtz, but washingtonsblog, a blog run by authors using pen names. A very reliable source – don’t you think?
Do you really trust a news source that claims Cheney, Rumsfeld and Yoo are war criminals?
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2011-05-09T10%3A54%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=20
Has Michael Moore has infiltrated First Things or am I just reading a belated April Fools joke?
Joe loves to use the word torture to describe any and all EITs even though he cannot show intent as required by the legal definition.
Here’s the legal definition of torture.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002340—-000-.html
I don’t care how many military “experts” Joe footnotes from left wing blogs or financial blogs (?) – nobody in their right mind believes the US would have experienced the success it has in thwarting terrorist threats without the use of EITs.
May 16th, 2011 | 1:39 pm
I don’t care how many military “experts” Joe footnotes from left wing blogs or financial blogs (?) – nobody in their right mind believes the US would have experienced the success it has in thwarting terrorist threats without the use of EITs.
So all of the military and intelligence interrogators that say that the techniques are ineffective are “not in their right minds?” Can you explain why we should trust your judgment over those who actually know something about the topic?
May 16th, 2011 | 3:26 pm
“In a letter to McCain obtained by Reuters, CIA director Leon Panetta was equivocal about the role enhanced interrogation played in producing intelligence on bin Laden.
‘Some of the detainees who provided useful information about the facilitator/courier’s role had been subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques,” Panetta wrote. But he added: ‘Whether those techniques were the ‘only timely and effective way’ to obtain such information is a matter of debate and cannot be established definitively.’
This is hardly the ringing denial of the use of EIT and its link to Osama’s demise that McCain led us to believe last week.
May 16th, 2011 | 4:04 pm
Mark Shea? The last thing I read by him was three or four years ago in which he referred to Vice President Cheney as a “war criminal.” And that WILL be the last thing I ever read by him!
May 16th, 2011 | 4:10 pm
I’m not in favor of torture, but I find the argument that it “never works” laughable, simply on the basis of pure logic. Of course it MIGHT work, in some cases. No reasonable person can deny this. To simply assert that information obtained this way is always inaccurate strikes me as simply unbelievable. Does that mean torture is a good idea? Nope. But it does mean that the argument should be had on the real issue–whether it is ever morally acceptable to torture, even if some good may result. Arguing about the “uselessness” of torture is a waste of time, because the claim is hard to believe, and in any case unprovable.
May 16th, 2011 | 4:18 pm
jesme I’m not in favor of torture, but I find the argument that it “never works” laughable, simply on the basis of pure logic. Of course it MIGHT work, in some cases. No reasonable person can deny this.
The issue is not whether it might work in some cases, but whether it is a reliable method. I can drive in a nail with a monkey-wrench but why would I when a hammer is more reliable?
As I’ve said before, I suspect the reason a lot of people support torture is because they like the idea of punishing terrorists. If it was purely a matter of using the most reliable methods for getting information then the issue would have never come up in the first place since no professional interrogators think it is a better method that those currently used.
May 16th, 2011 | 4:27 pm
“I’m not in favor of torture, but I find the argument that it “never works” laughable, simply on the basis of pure logic. Of course it MIGHT work, in some cases. No reasonable person can deny this. To simply assert that information obtained this way is always inaccurate strikes me as simply unbelievable.”
I also get the impression that many of those asserting universal inaccuracy are ignoring the fact that in many instances torture has been used in order to elicit inaccurate information.
May 16th, 2011 | 8:34 pm
[N]o professional interrogators think it is a better method than those currently used.
So how did it ever get used? Were amateurs running the interrogations?
May 16th, 2011 | 8:49 pm
I’m with jesme on this: “…the argument should be had on the real issue–whether it is ever morally acceptable to torture, even if some good may result.” And Catholic moral teaching inexorably leads to the conclusion that it is not.
And I disagree with Joe Carter’s estimation: “…I suspect the reason a lot of people support torture is because they like the idea of punishing terrorists.”
I’m certain most persons support torture to simply get information that will save lives.
Having a movie-reference for everything, I highly recommend Gregor Jordon’s “Unthinkable”. No emotional or idealistic stone on both sides of the debate remains unturned in this tense drama. The filmmaker draws no conclusions, but does provide all the elements required for a serious meditation on whether torture is ever justified.
May 17th, 2011 | 9:19 am
According to Joe, “the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and CIA have all said that torture [that is, waterboarding and other EIT that Joe labels "torture"] doesn’t work and should not be used.”
I can state from my own military experience that this is just simply not the case. I have spoken to many military interrogators who believe restricting strategic interrogators to the Army’s (really Joint) TACTICAL interrogation manual is foolish.
I should also say once again that General Michael Hayden is both an Air Force General (who also served in many joint and agency jobs) and served as Director of the CIA. He has stated without hesitation that harsh interrogation produced invaluable intelligence.
Finally, what of Joe’s repeated appeal to the authority of John McCain, and his experience as a POW to support his assertion that waterboarding (and other EITs) were torture and that they did not work. But then what do we make of this report by Marc Thiessen, here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/mccains-fellow-pows-support-waterboarding/2011/05/16/AF0f374G_blog.html
Thiessen reports that Col. Bud Day, a Medal of Honor, and a POW in a North Vietnamese prison camp: “I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.” Thiessen says he asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview. Denton, who received the Navy Cross, was asked if he thought waterboarding was torture. Denton said: “No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
Thiessen sums upt the matter: “John McCain is a hero, and he certainly has the moral authority to speak his mind on this topic. But he cannot claim that this position is “indisputable.” Many of his fellow POWs — including many who suffered horrifying torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese — believe that waterboarding is not torture.”
All that is left now, is to ask Senator McCain if he believes, with Joe, that the US has for decades “tortured” its own soldiers, sailors, marines or airmen in training. I think we already know what Day, Denton and Thorsness would say to THAT!
May 17th, 2011 | 9:19 am
[...] Joe pleased read Fernandez book No Way In, read accounts of the French resistance. (Note, I’m also [...]
May 17th, 2011 | 9:20 am
[...] Joe pleased read Fernandez book No Way In, read accounts of the French resistance. (Note, I’m also [...]
May 17th, 2011 | 9:22 am
The reason most people like torture is not because they like the idea of punishing terrorists, unless most people are sadists. Torture is clearly understood to be difficult. However, most people also believe mistreating one person to save thousands makes a lot of sense. If I thought torturing one person by waterboarding might save NYC from a nuclear attack, it might make a little sense to support it. And interestingly, the one Naval psychologist involved in the current combat who I heard speak on NPR said he believed and knew research that said yes indeed, torture did in key cases work, this being a guy who had been waterboarded himself:
http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/2009/05/04/apa-ethics-policy-maker-endorses-torture/
I think the idea that anyone *wants* or is eager to enjoy using torture is a bit cavalier. And the assertion that everyone knows torture does not work is ludicrous on the face of it, and insulting to a whole swathe of dedicated military personnel.
Lastly, Mark Shea as a source on this issue… are you on crack? I like the guy’s theological work, but on this one, he has jumped the shark. About as credible as Bill Maher on theism. Oh that we Catholics would be as passionate about cleaning up the clergy or even pro-Abort politicos preening at the altar. Happens a whole lot more than waterboarding, affects many more people, and can’t be argued as saving any lives.
But waterboarding is certainly a lot more sensational.
May 17th, 2011 | 9:33 am
I’ll aslo add Catholic moral teaching is very clear on the fact birth control is an evil, and there is very little moral outrage over the governmental involvement there by comparison. Again, not nearly as sensational is the images of an innocent soul being mistreated at the hands of malicious agent punishing terrorists despite the Vatican’s last minute interventions.
May 17th, 2011 | 11:28 am
John McCain’s misleading speech
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/john-mccains-misleading-speech/2011/05/16/AFirJy4G_story.html
May 17th, 2011 | 11:47 am
I’m glad that this blog takes a strong stand against torture. Do you really want to live in a society where torture is lawful? Also, there is a lot on this blog if torture works or not. I agree it isn’t effective, as I’ll confess to shooting Abraham Lincoln if tortured, but that isn’t the point. Torture degrades humanity as a whole, and is completely evil. Also, if you think torture is okay for terrorists, can we do it to child molesters?
May 17th, 2011 | 11:03 pm
Mark Shea is a joke. His hatred of Bush and Cheney shows in the number of posts over the years compared to his relative silence on Obama. Mark and others whining about the use of waterboarding should wake up to reality of warfare. Please tell me any enemy we have fought in the last 100 years that did not do far worse to our soldiers who fought in uniform. Any of our people captured not in uniform had zero rights and were shot. Terrorist have zero rights. They do not fight for a country, do not fight in uniform, or follow any code of justice. They most certainly are not US citizens. As to the use of these methods making America somehow worse, I do not think allowing a nuke to go off in NYC makes us better. The enemy must laugh every night about the weak kneed sisters who whine about how bad this waterboarding is or how forcing someone to stand without the proper amount of sleep. They would view this as treating a prisoner with great kindness as compared to anything they do to our guys.
Everyone quotes McCain, but fail to post the quotes of three other POW’s that think waterboarding is fine. Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor says “I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
Adm. Jeremiah Denton a strong Catholic and speaker at Catholic events around the country— the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview. It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance says, ““No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.”
Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture: “To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact