As I watched Countdown last night, I saw how Keith had on an ex-CIA agent who talked about how torture is a very ineffective means of getting accurate information from someone who may or may not know something. I've heard this sort of thing for a while, and I'd imagine that amongst people who do interrogations in military intelligence and the CIA, they probably know that torture is pretty ineffective (in addition to being illegal and immoral). So, at that point, I wondered to myself, why is Bush just so damn insistent on having the "right" to torture terrorism suspects? Surely more than a few people from the CIA or military intelligence have come to Bush and said "look, torture just doesn't work in terms of getting good information." (more)
Well, as stubborn and pigheaded as Bush is, even he must realize that torture is an ineffective means of gathering accurate information. Assuming that that's the case, what motives would Bush have to continue supporting torture so vehemently? I can think of three options, none of which are mutually exclusive.
1. Bush is a sadist who enjoys seeing "ragheads" tortured. Knowing Bush's ugly character, this is entirely probable. I mean, this is the guy who giggled over the prospect of executing that woman in Texas, back when he was Governor.
2. Bush wants to support torture to look "tough" for his racist, authoritarian base. These are people who think that 24 is real life and that terrorists will immediately reveal the location of the hidden bomb and how to dismantle it if you put them on the rack or in thumbscrews for a while. Or waterboarding, for that matter. Perhaps it's also a way to signal to moderate/centrist voters who'll say "well, I don't approve of torture, but at least W is getting tough with those terrorists." It's a disgusting political calculation, but that's never stopped Bush before. (though, personally, I do NOT believe that torture is an electoral winner, though Democrats and decent Republicans need to stand up and forcefully rebut Bush on this point, again and again).
3. The most chilling possibility is that Bush knows damn well that torture doesn't work, but that it is very effective in getting confessions. Most comments I've heard about torture say that while it's ineffective at getting accurate information, it's very effective in getting confessions. A torture victim will often confess to anything, just to make the pain stop. So, for Bush and his Crime Family, torture becomes an effective tactic to force terror suspects to say anything in order to give Bush the "intelligence" he wants, in order to justify staying in Iraq or to justify invading Iran or Syria or anywhere else in the world where Bush's corporate allies want him to invade. And if the veil of secrecy is kept over the torture, Bush can have all these "intelligence reports" popping up, saying that "reliable informants" have told the CIA or military intelligence that Iran has nuclear-tipped ICBMs pointed at major US cities or somesuch and that the bombing has to start in five minutes. It's a disturbing possiblity. The only good news is that Bush has cried wolf so often that many people, except for Bush's idiot base, actually believes a damn thing he says anymore.