The debate continues.\u00a0 What is interrogation and what is torture?\u00a0 Are there situations in which interrogation is inadequate, situations requiring something more? In the abstract, it seems rather easy to determine what is or is not morally acceptable, what is or is not torture.\u00a0 But, how easy is the decision when it’s personal; when the lives at risk are American, when our national security is in jeopardy?\u00a0 How far do we go to get information?\u00a0 What would you be willing to do to a terrorist if the information they had could prevent another 9\/11?\u00a0 If you had a family member in the World Trade Towers and you were interrogating a terrorist before the destruction, would you still find waterboarding heinous?\u00a0 If summarily executing a terrorist could save the life of an American soldier would you hesitate?\u00a0 The urgency of these situations, according to Professor Darius Rejali of Reed College in Oregon, is “morally the only way a democratic society is able to justify torture.”<\/p>\n
The newly revised Army Field Manual defines as torture, and bans, forced nakedness, hooding, beating, sexual humiliation, threatening with dogs, deprivation of food or water, mock executions, electrical shocks, burns, and waterboarding.\u00a0 Are these definitions correct?\u00a0 Is it this black and white?\u00a0 Are there situations requiring more than just interrogation, situations the current administration advocates require “enhanced interrogation techniques?”\u00a0 How do we decide?\u00a0 What are our obligations to our troops, to our country, to humanity?\u00a0 How do we find that line and can we cross it?\u00a0 Do we need to worry if torturing detainees would undermine American values or damage our image in the world?\u00a0 Isn’t being a prisoner of war or detainee supposed to be uncomfortable, supposed to provoke anxiety, supposed to disrupt your sleep?\u00a0 But can these types of pressure and discomfort become abuse and torture?\u00a0<\/p>\n
What has history shown us about the usefulness of torture?\u00a0 Hitler’s Gestapo got their best information not from torture, but from tips, informers, and cooperation with other agencies.\u00a0 The torture they did employ resulted in little, if any, useful information.\u00a0 In France between 1500 and 1750 torture was legal, including using bone-crushing splints, pumping stomachs, pouring boiling oil on the feet, among other things.\u00a0 Despite this horrendous abuse, most of the time they were unable to get any statement at all.\u00a0 Surprisingly, it is difficult to get a prisoner to say anything while being tortured.\u00a0 A Japanese field manual found in Burma during World War II described torture as “the clumsiest possible method for gathering intelligence.”\u00a0 The Japanese used torture for its “proper” purpose, to create fear and intimidation, not to get information.\u00a0 I could not find any literature or research suggesting that torture was of any value.<\/p>\n
But, isn’t ricocheting to the other extreme equally inappropriate?\u00a0 Do we need to use caution so we do not over-react to reports of prisoner or detainee mistreatment; so we do not over-react to actions that may be reasonable?\u00a0 At 2 a.m. on November 4, 2003, a team of navy seals captured a “high-value” target during an extremely violent struggle at his home, including a stove falling on the terrorist and a seal. When the seals transferred him to C.I.A. custody he had a black eye and a cut on his face.\u00a0 During the C.I.A. interrogation he died, the death now under investigation by the Justice Department.\u00a0 The political over-reaction that followed led to military-justice proceedings against several of the seals.\u00a0 They were exonerated; however, this must have sent a rather chilling message to military personnel.\u00a0 Is this the way to congratulate a job well done, the way to welcome home heroes?\u00a0 The seals weren’t just capturing a terrorist; they were fighting for their lives.\u00a0 Can we recognize and end torture while allowing our military to do its job, while understanding the realities and ugliness of war?\u00a0<\/p>\n
What about the technology and pharmacology of tomorrow?\u00a0 Will there be things we can use to enhance interrogation?\u00a0 Soon, we may be able to use Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to evaluate the truthfulness of statements made by prisoners and detainees.\u00a0 There are also medications that are safe and will “reduce conversational inhibitions and the urge to deceive.”\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
The evidence seems clear; torture simply does not work.\u00a0 Torture may actually cost American lives by voiding the opportunity to gain genuinely useful information.\u00a0 Two former CIA agents probably stated it best; information is “more effectively gained by methodical, careful, psychologically based interrogation.”\u00a0 Moreover, combining proper interrogation techniques with medications and MRI will allow us to secure the information we need for our troops and national security while maintaining the values of our heritage.<\/p>\n
Our political leaders need to find the middle ground, ending torture while supporting needed interrogation, without undermining the ability of our military personnel to do their job.<\/p>\n