American torturers must be the most deluded people in the world. They actually believe their job is to extract information, instead of the reality that they serve to commit atrocities in order to terrorize (and thus subjugate) the “free” people in the same group as the torture victim (nowadays Arabs, Muslims, and political dissidents). State-directed torture, therefore, is always an act of war. But there’s another issue with torture.
How does one tell when a torture victim is resisting? It’s not like a normal social setting where each party is in their “right mind”. Every torture victim is terrorized, which breaks down his mental state and breaks down the standard modes of communication that alerts someone to the resistance of the other.
A torturer always begins with the belief that the victim is resisting since he doesn’t know otherwise (and since, really, he doesn’t care).
For example, let’s say an American torturer asks his victim: “Are you a member of Al Qaeda?”. Assuming the victim is still in a state of mind to actually know the answer to the question, he either answers yes or no, but how does the torturer know he’s being honest, or resisting?
You might say that the whole chain of questions determines such a thing. So after a “no” answer the torturer applies a waterboarding session, and asks the question again. Let’s say he gets the same answer (which is not the answer he wants to hear). Is this just more resistance or is it stubborn honesty?
It all continues exactly like this. The process of torture as it applies to the attempt to gain information is a kind of psychological/intellectual inquiry made by the torturer wherein he needs to make a determination concerning the victim’s condition. The best way to make that determination is to enforce a condition. The reason to “break someone’s will” is not to gain information but to enable the torturer to assume a framework of understanding for any answers that occur. That is to say, if one doesn’t know whether someone’s will is broken or not it’s necessary to do one’s best to break it, and then assume it’s broken unless otherwise alerted.
People who still believe torture is done to gain information should be asking the obvious question – why aren’t lie detector machines used during interrogations? The answer is obvious, but only if the question is asked.