This post is a reply to many of the comments I received on the article from others who’ve either had the same training or have heard of the water-boarding technique that is done in other training venues.
My reply may seem that I’ve gone Conservative — I can assure you that is not the case! However, I do understand the realities of the necessary use of certain unpleasant tools to get potentially life saving information from people that really want to kill us! And I must say that I DO NOT agree with the application of conditioning techniques and interrogation in general by untrained personnel! That said, here is an expansion of my original article on water-boarding.
Reply to Comments:
Thanks for the responses on this controversial topic.
I did not mention that part of my[SERE]training also included many techniques that were likely used at Abu…such as “water dousing,” “sleep deprivation,” “walling,” “small area confinement,” as well as the subtle psychological probing that arguably was much more effective at getting information, especially if employed AFTER “stressing” techniques had been used.
What most folks don’t get is that these actions WILL not actually physically harm the subject; no permanent physical damage is done. The idea is to CONDITION the subject to respond to stimuli in a specific way…like trust.
Yes, that’s right, I said TRUST! It is possible to program someone to be completely trusting of you even after experiencing high stress, especially if you are the one that promises the REMOVAL of those stresses!
Most people don’t know about “negative reinforced operant behavior conditioning.” This is a method of conditioning that works by programming a behavioral response to a REMOVAL of an unpleasant stimulus, ie. the stressing such as “water-boarding.” Vital necessary information CAN then be obtained. However “stressing” alone is useless and of course damaging or maiming the subject is of no use either. Also by using operant conditioning, the response ‘extinction’ is reduced dramatically, i.e. the initial conditioned stimulus in the form of the stressing need not be employed again for some time and the reinforced behavior will still be present. In other words after stressing the subject over an initial time period…maybe days…the desired response will ’stick’ and the need for repeated stressing is reduced. After the promise of removal of the stressors and the appearance of a sympathetic interrogator, if the conditioning was done well, the subject will be more than happy to tell you anything you want to know.
We were taught some of this (not the psychology however) at SERE so we were clued in to the techniques beforehand. Whether or not the enemy is aware of this, I can’t say but I do know that creating a stressful condition environment is COMMON practice among most if not all of the military intelligence field operatives.
Now believe it or not, I am a Progressive Liberal, Moderate mind you, and I can see the why in the torture debate. But to my mind, “torture” would have to be defined as any action that maims, permanently damages or kills the prisoner. Humiliation or any of the above mentioned stress techniques, I do not view as torture and can be very effective IF employed by TRAINED intelligence personnel.
The key word here is TRAINED. These techniques are sophisticated and require, believe it or not, a professional detachment and level of skill reserved for highly trained interrogators who must remain calm and objective– without any sense of anger, revenge or other emotion that may cloud their judgment. The problem as I see it with Abu, was that the “sessions” were in the main, conducted by personnel that were likely not even familiar with basic conditioning techniques and had no business interacting with the prisoners in this manner. To be frank, they should have at least been trained in the concept of “good cop-bad cop,” perhaps then acting as the “sympathetic” jailer to whom confidences could be shared after a session of stressing.
Do I believe there were abuses at Abu Ghraib?…I could say, yes the likelihood is high that there was. And the reasons are not simply due to the “torture” but principally due to the lack of training and abuse of power by the soldiers. Civilians want the protection afforded them by our brave and sacrificing folks in the Military, but they don’t want to know or take the time to understand the realities of war. Maybe Jack Nicholson’s character was right: “You can’t handle the truth!”
2009
Waterboarding: It’s not just for Waterparks-REDUX
by Mike Ryan
If you haven’t read my article ” Waterboarding: It’s not just for Waterparks!“…go ahead and take a look now.
This post is a reply to many of the comments I received on the article from others who’ve either had the same training or have heard of the water-boarding technique that is done in other training venues.
My reply may seem that I’ve gone Conservative — I can assure you that is not the case! However, I do understand the realities of the necessary use of certain unpleasant tools to get potentially life saving information from people that really want to kill us! And I must say that I DO NOT agree with the application of conditioning techniques and interrogation in general by untrained personnel! That said, here is an expansion of my original article on water-boarding.
Reply to Comments:
Thanks for the responses on this controversial topic.
I did not mention that part of my[SERE]training also included many techniques that were likely used at Abu…such as “water dousing,” “sleep deprivation,” “walling,” “small area confinement,” as well as the subtle psychological probing that arguably was much more effective at getting information, especially if employed AFTER “stressing” techniques had been used.
What most folks don’t get is that these actions WILL not actually physically harm the subject; no permanent physical damage is done. The idea is to CONDITION the subject to respond to stimuli in a specific way…like trust.
Yes, that’s right, I said TRUST! It is possible to program someone to be completely trusting of you even after experiencing high stress, especially if you are the one that promises the REMOVAL of those stresses!
Most people don’t know about “negative reinforced operant behavior conditioning.” This is a method of conditioning that works by programming a behavioral response to a REMOVAL of an unpleasant stimulus, ie. the stressing such as “water-boarding.” Vital necessary information CAN then be obtained. However “stressing” alone is useless and of course damaging or maiming the subject is of no use either. Also by using operant conditioning, the response ‘extinction’ is reduced dramatically, i.e. the initial conditioned stimulus in the form of the stressing need not be employed again for some time and the reinforced behavior will still be present. In other words after stressing the subject over an initial time period…maybe days…the desired response will ’stick’ and the need for repeated stressing is reduced. After the promise of removal of the stressors and the appearance of a sympathetic interrogator, if the conditioning was done well, the subject will be more than happy to tell you anything you want to know.
We were taught some of this (not the psychology however) at SERE so we were clued in to the techniques beforehand. Whether or not the enemy is aware of this, I can’t say but I do know that creating a stressful condition environment is COMMON practice among most if not all of the military intelligence field operatives.
Now believe it or not, I am a Progressive Liberal, Moderate mind you, and I can see the why in the torture debate. But to my mind, “torture” would have to be defined as any action that maims, permanently damages or kills the prisoner. Humiliation or any of the above mentioned stress techniques, I do not view as torture and can be very effective IF employed by TRAINED intelligence personnel.
The key word here is TRAINED. These techniques are sophisticated and require, believe it or not, a professional detachment and level of skill reserved for highly trained interrogators who must remain calm and objective– without any sense of anger, revenge or other emotion that may cloud their judgment. The problem as I see it with Abu, was that the “sessions” were in the main, conducted by personnel that were likely not even familiar with basic conditioning techniques and had no business interacting with the prisoners in this manner. To be frank, they should have at least been trained in the concept of “good cop-bad cop,” perhaps then acting as the “sympathetic” jailer to whom confidences could be shared after a session of stressing.
Do I believe there were abuses at Abu Ghraib?…I could say, yes the likelihood is high that there was. And the reasons are not simply due to the “torture” but principally due to the lack of training and abuse of power by the soldiers. Civilians want the protection afforded them by our brave and sacrificing folks in the Military, but they don’t want to know or take the time to understand the realities of war. Maybe Jack Nicholson’s character was right: “You can’t handle the truth!”
-Mike Ryan
Editor, the Modernsquib
Technorati Tags: abu ghraib, torture, waterboard