Originally Posted by Misty8723
It's been proven that it actually doesn't lead to good information, because people will say anything to get the torture to stop.
As Cindy has already said, this isn't true.
From an April 17, 2009 Wall Street Journal article by Gen. Michael Hayden, director of the CIA from 2006 -2009, and Michael B. Mukasey, attorney general of the United States from 2007 - 2009 (sorry, I can't find a link for it):
"...the next of the justifications for disclosing and thus abandoning these measures (various interrogation techniques including waterboarding): that they don't work anyway, and that those who are subjected to them will simply make up information in order to end their ordeal. This ignorant view of how interrogations are conducted is belied by both experience and common sense. If coercive interrogation has been administered to obtain confessions, one might understand the argument. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who organized the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, among others, and who boasted of having beheaded Daniel Pearl, could eventually have felt pressed to provide a false confession. But confessions aren't the point. Intelligence is. Interrogation is conducted by using such obvious approaches as asking questions whose correct answers are already known and only when truthful information is provided proceeding to what may not be known. Moreover, intelligence can be verified, correlated and used to get information from other detainees, and has been; none of this information is used in isolation.
The terrorist Abu Zubaydah...disclosed some information voluntarily. But he was coerced into disclosing information that led to the capture of Ramzi bin al Shibh, another of the planners of Sept. 11, who in turn disclosed information which - when combined with what was learned from Abu Zubaydah - helped lead to the capture of KSM and other senior terrorists, and the disruption of follow-on plots aimed at both Europe and the US. Details of these successes, and the methods used to obtain them, were disclosed repeatedly in more than 30 congressional briefings and hearings beginning in 2002..."
Originally Posted by Misty8723
There are much better ways to get information, ways that won't end up being such a great recruitment tool for anti-american terrorist groups and gives us no moral ground to stand on if our citizens are being subjected to torture anywhere in the world.
What specifically are those "much better ways to get information'"?
From the WSJ article: "The techniques themselves were used selectively against only a small number of hard-core prisoners who successfully resisted other forms of interrogation, and then only with the explicit authorization of the director of the CIA. Of the thousands of unlawful combatants captured by the US, fewer than 100 were detained and questioned in the CIA program. Of those, fewer than one-third were subjected to any of the techniques discussed in these opinions...Even with the growing success of other intelligence tools, fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of al Qaeda came from those interrogations."
Another quote from the same article on the subject of our techniques being used as a "recruitment tool":
"...it seems unlikely that the people who beheaded Nicholas Berg and Daniel Pearl, and have tortured and slain other American captives, are likely to be shamed into giving up violence by the news that the US will no longer interrupt the sleep cycle of captured terrorists even to help elicit intellligence that could save the lives of its citizens."
Terrorists have no honor, nor morality. It is naive to think that if the US discontinues enhanced interrogation techniques, they will behave in kind.