"Bruce In Bangkok" wrote in message
...

In one case I witnessed the individual who "confessed" admitting that
he was beaten until he confessed, in a second, an individual who
stated he witnessed the act said that it worked and several
descriptions I have read of WW II British agents in Occupied France
specifically state that the Germans gained sufficient information from
partisans that they were able to capture others in the group.

As well there are fairly well documented cases in Russia of people
who, for some reason, confessed to outlandish crimes and were
executed. Generally attributed to torture.

The stories of "brain washing" in Korea were not, I suspect, cut from
whole cloth.

In short the "it doesn't work" argument needs a lot of qualification
to be wholly correct.

Cheers,

Bruce

People being people, Bruce is exactly correct. With some people, the mere
suggestion that they might experience some discomfort will be enough to get
them to spill their guts, tell everything they know, and sell all their
compatriots down the river. With others, the more pain you cause them the
more intransigent and unbreakable they become. Particularly if they feel
they are serving a higher cause, are somewhat masochistic anyway, and are
angry at being tortured by those whom they believe to be evil.

That being said, how can you distinguish between the varying degrees between
the extremes? And regardless of the "quality" of information one might
receive by torturing a prisoner, how does a Nation maintain the moral high
ground when it is willing to torture prisoners?

Win their hearts and minds -- and you cannot do that by force.