A-Bomb? Would torture cause you to give up your family to the terrorists?
2007-11-05 03:52:47 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Torture works to an extent, but it is unreliable as a single source.
You tell me how the Germans didn't know about the D-Day invasion. Maybe because even Ike wasn't sure of the day until he gave the order. And maybe the dead Major who we allowed to float ashore with the fake plans worked pretty well.
Now explain how many troops that were captured by the Japanese actually had any knowledge of the A bomb.
Grow up and start thinking for yourself instead of the biased media you must pay attention to.
2007-11-05 04:04:57 · answer #1 · answered by SFC_Ollie 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Germans had intelligence accurately indicating where the invasion would occur; they ignored it because there was a great deal more intel buttressing their assumptions about the landings happening at Calais.
The Japanese didn't see the atomic bomb coming. If you don't know what question to ask, it doesn't matter what answer you might get.
The problem with torture is that you will ultimately be told whatever you want to hear - NOT what you need to know.
All torture gets you is a false confession to doing something somebody didn't actually do. The Soviets and the Nazis routinely used torture to elicit confessions from people to provide a quasi-legal pretext to incarcerate them, or kill them.
A successful interrogation is one that provides a suspect incentive. Wether that be a lighter sentence, or food or money, or whatever; you give a suspect a reason to cooperate.
2007-11-05 04:15:28 · answer #2 · answered by Sim - plicimus 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is well known within those who are in security studies and intelligence that information obtained through torture is not reliable.
People will end up saying what they have to say to get the torture to stop.
The only way torture is useful is if there is some other information to use to compare it to, or if multiple subjects have the same story (although if they are trained, this could be a fake story).
Many higher ranking officers in the military do not favor torture for this reason. They also don't want to start a precendent of using torture in case of the unfortunate possiblity of their own troops being captured.
2007-11-05 04:09:10 · answer #3 · answered by pdx_girl 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Those are the two most stupid things to compare to. First lets go with the A-Bomb. Only a few top government officials knew about it. The pilot of the Enola Gay (the plane that dropped the first a-bomb) did'nt even know what he was dropping until it hit the ground,and he saw the flash. Now let's go with d-day. The Germans didn't have any American prisoners at the time so how would they get any information from torture? Who would they turture to get it? Also the U.S. government planted false information with the Nazi's to make them think the D-Day invasion would be someplace else. Which is to long of a story to get into,and one I'm sure you wouldn't understand.
2007-11-05 04:05:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The nazis actually did know about the d-day invasion and even the exact place of it. They jsut considered it to be too outrageous, even stupid, of a place to invade. They put most of their forces several miles away at another beach (A beach that had been said to be the landing point on an intercepted communication). Oh, and torture didn't get them the answer either way.
Would torture make me give up my family? Probably not. I mean, sure, it would be horrendous and I would wish for death every single moment of it. I just like to think that I love my family enough to bear through it.
Also, torture does not honestly work. It only helps to harden the resolve of the subject and, if the subject dies during tough interrogation, gives the cause another martyr.
2007-11-05 04:05:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The problem here is that you don't have a clue about WWII history, or you certainly would have found other examples.
The did know about the Normandy landing site....but due to counter-measures they did not believe their interrogation or other intelligence. Hitler flat out believed the attacks would be in a different location. Even after the invasion took place, it was a while before he finally saw the truth and released his reserves.
Torture does work...but you need to be able to fit the piece of information together.
Personally....I would rather see the US use those methods, then deal with a terrorist attack that we know is going to happen sooner or later. If the Dem's get elected....it will be sooner.
2007-11-05 05:33:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
In short, because normal soldiers wouldn't know about the top military secrets (for just that reason.) If you want real first hand accounts of how torture works read "When Hell was in Session" by Jeremiah A. Denton.
2007-11-05 04:03:18 · answer #7 · answered by completelyredefined 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not many people were told bout these attacks. The attackers were probably only told the day before. Most of them would be trained to resist torture.
2007-11-05 04:01:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You invalidate your argument by using such ridiculous examples. Only a few people knew about the bomb and certainly not the POWs in Japanese prisons. Who did Germany have to torture before D-Day that would have known about the invasion plan???
2007-11-05 03:57:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Well, the simple answer to your question is that any POWs would not have been privy to the information in the first place.
I am not saying it works, I am just saying your rhetoric is poor :)
2007-11-05 04:44:32 · answer #10 · answered by Barry C 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋