Torture as an Interrogation Device

Torture is one of the most extreme methods of eliciting information; unfortunately, it has been used for centuries and is still prevalent worldwide.

Thesis: Counterterrorism through interrogation is wrong and leads to false information.

Scientific Perspective

In 2006 the Intelligence Science Board, a civilian board that advises the U.S. Department of Defense on technical and scientific matters, stated that there was information to support the declaration that torture produces reliable information. Shane O’Mara, a neurobiologist associated with Trinity College in Dublin, analyzed the interrogation methods of the Bush administration. O’Mara refers to such techniques as “folk psychology,” and “are unlikely to do anything other than the opposite of that intended by coercive or ‘enhance’ interrogation.” To recall data accumulated in the brain, it is necessary to activate the prefrontal cortex, site intentionality, and hippocampus, where long-term memory is stored. When one is under stress, a hormone is released which limits cognition including that contained within the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. This was documented in a study of Special Forces soldiers who had been deprived of food and sleep, which significantly diminished their ability to recall previously retained information. O’Mara related this to waterboarding, stating that it is “an extreme stressor and has the potential to elicit widespread stress-induced changes in the brain.”

Under stress, the nucleus that stimulates fear and anxiety is triggered and impairs the ability to differentiate between true and false memories. As a result torture triggers irregular patterns in the frontal and temporal lobes, subsequently impairing memory. Consequently, a question t...

... middle of paper ...

...hinks the interrogator wants to hear."[4] Torture is not only ineffective in obtaining both accurate and useful information, but also makes it more difficult to obtain future coöperate from that source. It is likely to be counter productive since a defeated enemy is less likely to surrender if he understands that his captor will torture him. Instead, he will resist, making his capture more costly. Conversely, humane treatment encourages surrender (Conroy, 2000, p. 115). Furthermore, torture elicits wide-ranging consequences by damaging the reputation of the offender, by creating hostility toward its civilians and military, provides justification for reprisal against its population and undermines the nations creditability when it takes a moral position on human rights. Any ostensible benefits of enhanced interrogation must be weighted against these proven costs.