Quick Notes: Oblivious to the Obvious
April 26th, 2009
Fox News poll question:
Regardless of whether or not you think harsh interrogation techniques work, do you think the CIA should be allowed to use these techniques to obtain information from prisoners that might protect the United States from terrorist attacks?
Okay, let’s parse that:
A. Regardless of whether or not you think harsh interrogation techniques work
B. techniques to obtain information from prisoners that might protect the United States from terrorist attacks
So, whether or not they work, should techniques that might work be employed?
The Fox Noise laddies have worked overtime in the critical thinking department, it seems.
Afterthought: they did not include as a possible answer, “This is a stupid question.”
I’ve always though the solution to the whole ‘ticking bomb’ scenario is simple.
If an interogator is so certain that this one individual has information that can stop an imminent threat, and they are certain that the can get this information by way of torture, then… they do it. And go to prison for it. No excuse for being right.
Practically speaking, I am betting that ‘certain enough to torture’ is unlikely to be ‘certain enough to go to prison’. But if it is, and they are right, give them a medal and lock them up. If they are wrong, no medal.
Although stark, that sounds rational–though I would hate to have that job. The question would be, how dedicated to your country are you? How much do you believe in what you are doing? It would certainly cut out the torture-just-to-see-what-we-can-get. And it reflects what I think should be the national morality: torture is not an acceptable practice, and we do not condone it.
The thing is, if it were left up to professionals, they probably would not torture much if at all. Positive treatment has shown in the past to be more effective in most cases–it works on enemy preconceptions and helps break down their guard. Al Qaeda operatives (real ones) and similar terrorists have qualities which make them poor torture subjects in any case. And everything I have heard says that torture simply doesn’t work well. Your scenario of if “they are certain that the can get this information by way of torture” is not, from what people say, a realistic one. We’ve been too preconditioned by movies and TV to think it is.
“Torture doesn’t work” is kinda flimsy.
“Do unto others as you would have done unto you” is fecking canonical — in Matthew and Luke — so one would think the fundie Christians would be on board with it, but the idiots among them aren’t:
http://www.christianpost.com/Society/Ethics_rights/2008/09/poll-golden-rule-coaxes-evangelicals-to-rethink-torture-stance-12/index.html