If it is a fact that info obtained by torture isn't reliable, it wouldn't be a controversial issue, would it?

Question

I am not asking if torture is right, wrong, humane or inhumane - I'm not asking if it should or shouldn't be used in our war on terror.

It just seems to me that if the information gained by torture is never reliable, as many people have indicated in their answers, then it wouldn't even be an issue because no one would torture anyone if they knew the information they obtained was bogus.

Obviously, when these people try and validate their answer by the WMD information we initially gathered from captured insurgents, they don't seem to realize that these terrorists really believed that Saddam had these weapons - and, hense, they were telling the "truth" as best they knew it.

Answer 1

Keep fighting! Thanks

Answer 2

I think sometimes the interrogators get good answers at the beginning of the torture session. Then, the suspect runs out of information and begins making stuff up to stop the torture.

Of course, if he's innocent, all of the suspect's apparently incriminating statements are false. A Canadian Arab was kidnapped by the CIA a couple of years ago at a US airport because his name was similar to a name on the want list. While in a secret Syrian prison which was literally a hole in the ground, he confessed to training with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. He was released after a year. He believes they kept him so long because the US government didn't want to admit their mistake.

Answer 3

You are trying to use logic in understanding the neanderthal mentality.