|
There is a wealth of evidence to suggest that torture is the least effective way of gathering information. The information gathered under toture is the minimum needed to stop the pain; the informant is not clear headed and therefore the information is prone to inaccuracy; prisoners who believe themselves beloved of God become more entrenched and unwilling.
'Enhanced interrogation' has been used in some instances, but the useful information gathered from prisoners has generally been through theuse of ordinary interrogation techniques. Added to that there are several prominent cases of individuals who have been subjected to normal interrogation techniques actually changing their minds and begun to work for their captors, against their former groups. Several such figures have become active in the fight against extremism within universities and the like, performing outreach with youths who are believed to be vulnerable to extremist propoganda.
Now, there may be odd cases where information given up during waterboarding or sleep deprivation turns out to be genuine and useful. But there is no way to know whether they'd have given more information through ordinary techniques. There is good evidence however to suggest that clever interrogators get more and better information than brutal interrogators.
So, whilst waterboarding may well get you a name, a long and well-crafted standard interrogation may well get you more. And has the added benefit of possibly breaking through the brainwashing and turning one of them. Then you really do have a useful informant.
Quite aside from the moral dimension, it is the least effective way of information gathering.
|