Effective interrogation without torture 101

[Drake Tungsten]

He's going to be ashamed, and humiliated, and cold. He'll tell you anything you want to hear to get his clothes back.

Isn't the whole point of an interrogation to get the prisoner to tell you what you want to hear?

People don't cooperate with you unless they have some reason to.

Wanting to sit down or get those big, infidel titties out of your face isn't a "reason" to cooperate? Seems like another facile attempt to convince us that any interrogation technique that goes beyond talking with the prisoner doesn't work...

[Ramo]

Sounds like another facile attempt to pass off our harsh interrogation practices as all comparable to shaking titties at the detainees's face.

Isn't the whole point of an interrogation to get the prisoner to tell you what you want to hear?

No, it's to tell you useful information. What you want to hear may very well be a lie. Of course, he only elicited confessions from al-Qaeda members involved in the embassy bombings. I'm sure Jack Bauer's much more knowledgable...

[Ramo]

I wonder what vital info the near perpetual solitary confinement of Jose Padilla for ~3 years elicited. Besides proof that he's capable of losing his sanity...

[Drake Tungsten]

No, it's to tell you useful information.

Useful information is "what you want to hear". Duh...

What you want to hear may very well be a lie.

I doubt any interrogators want to hear lies.

Of course, he only elicited confessions from al-Qaeda members involved in the embassy bombings.

Good for him, but can he, using his methods, get actionable intelligence for us to use in prosecuting the War on Terror while operating under severe time constraints? Getting confessions from Al Qaeda members with all the time in the world to talk to them is quite a bit different than getting bin Laden's location out of a captured jihadi before Osama figures out he's been compromised and splits...

[Ramo]

Useful information is "what you want to hear". Duh...

No, it's not. That's what Coleman was getting at. I know that you were struggling with reading comprehension before, but this isn't complicated...

Good for him, but can he, using his methods, get actionable intelligence for us to use in prosecuting the War on Terror while operating under severe time constraints? Getting confessions from Al Qaeda members with all the time in the world to talk to them is quite a bit different than getting bin Laden's location out of a captured jihadi before Osama figures out he's been compromised and splits...

This is supposed to be some variation of the ticking time bomb scenario? As the standard answer goes, if in the improbable case that we know with near certainty that the suspect has such knowledge, rules will be broken and the interrogators could be pardoned afterwards. There's no need to institutionalize such practices. That's how bad things happen.

But for the vast majority of cases doing a good job means due process, as Coleman said.

[Kuciwalker]

Except Drake's scenario is far more likely to occur and there are less drastic consequences in the public mind if the "torture" fails. Thus, if we don't tell them it's permitted they won't even use it when appropriate.

[Dr Strangelove]

How about convincing them that they've died and that you, the interrogator, are their heavenly appointed councilor who must put forth their case before the heavenly tribunal which will establish what if merit the reward of a martyr? You could even let them see a sample of the reward. Request that they supply in detail their role in the insurrection, supplying names, dates and locations so that their claims can be substantiated. Should they question whether the all seeing all knowing almighty should need their testimony give them some story about the need to know their true state of mind during the events or at least remind them of what happens to those who question the will of Allah. Drugs might be of some use at some point during this process.

[Drake Tungsten]

No, it's not.

Yes, it is. Seems pretty obvious.

This is supposed to be some variation of the ticking time bomb scenario?

No, it's a scenario that's far more plausible and harder to dismiss out of hand than the ticking time-bomb scenario.

[Ramo]

Except Drake's scenario is far more likely to occur and there are less drastic consequences in the public mind if the "torture" fails. Thus, if we don't tell them it's permitted they won't even use it when appropriate.

Umm.. you're saying that our politicos wouldn't pardon such an interrogation if it leads to bin Laden's death? Are you insane?

The point ultimately is that this scenario still isn't very probable. So if you institutionalize these practices, you're going to get a ****load of false positives, and with that, the reduced capability to pursue the much more effective Coleman model with these suspects. As well as a hell of a lot of ill-will from detainees. And you certainly don't help public diplomacy...

[Drake Tungsten]

The point ultimately is that this scenario still isn't very probable.

I beg to differ. It probably happens every time we capture a Taliban or Al Qaeda leader of any significance in Afghanistan. You're claiming it's improbable because you don't want to deal seriously with the issues such a scenario raises...

[Ramo]

If that were true, bin Laden would've been dead ages ago. It's not like we're shy about shipping our detainees off to Syria or Egypt.

[Drake Tungsten]

Not every captured jihadi that is high-ranking enough to have information on bin Laden's whereabouts will actually know them (or know them at the time of their capture). Unfortunately, there's no way to be sure whether they've got the goods or not until you interrogate them. The only sure thing is that the "Coleman model" will ensure that you have no chance of finding out where Osama is in time to nab him...

[Ramo]

Not every captured jihadi that is high-ranking enough to have information on bin Laden's whereabouts will actually know them

Duh. I repeat, improbable.

[Ramo]

The only sure thing is that the "Coleman model" will ensure that you have no chance of finding out where Osama is in time to nab him...

The Coleman model is good for getting moles...

[Drake Tungsten]

Duh. I repeat, improbable.

Whatever scenario you're imagining may very well be improbable, but the one I proposed and am discussing (the capture of a jihadi who may have time-sensitive information on bin Laden's location) isn't...

The Coleman model is good for getting double-agents...

It would also be good for getting confessions from terrorist we're planning on prosecuting. I'm not saying the Coleman model is wortless; it clearly has its uses. I'm just saying that it's ill-suited for some situations, situations in which the use of harsher interrogation methods makes sense.