Torture to Combat Terrorism? It Doesn't Work, but Good Cop Bad Cop Does | Juliet Kayyem | Big Think | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR
Being tough and aggressive in national security is ineffective, and torture tactics do not work in gathering vital information.
Key Insights
- π Aggressiveness without strategic planning is ineffective in national security.
- π Torture tactics like waterboarding post-9/11 did not yield valuable information.
- ποΈ Successful interrogation relies on building rapport rather than using aggressive tactics.
- π¦Ί Tough counterterrorism policies cannot guarantee 100% safety from terrorism.
- π Violence and political influence are present across various countries, making it impossible to eradicate completely.
- π Accepting risks and responding appropriately is crucial in national security.
- π· Toughness talk in security policy can mask ineffective strategies.
Transcript
Read and summarize the transcript of this video on Glasp Reader (beta).
Questions & Answers
Q: Why is being tough not an effective national security policy?
Being tough does not equate to effective policies as it lacks substance and clear strategies for dealing with security threats. Aggression without proper planning or understanding only leads to inefficiency.
Q: What was the outcome of using torture tactics like waterboarding in national security?
Torture tactics like waterboarding after 9/11 failed to yield any useful information and resulted in a situation where detainees couldn't be put through a criminal court due to evidence tampering. It was an ineffective and damaging approach.
Q: What is the key to successful interrogation in national security?
Successful interrogation relies on establishing rapport with the individual being questioned to make them comfortable enough to share information willingly. This approach is more effective than aggressive tactics like torture.
Q: Why is the myth of a tough counterterrorism policy dangerous?
The myth perpetuates the belief that only tough policies can ensure 100% safety from terrorism, which is unrealistic. It creates a false narrative that being tough on security guarantees safety, which is not true in reality.
Summary & Key Takeaways
-
Being more aggressive or tougher is not a policy but just talk without substance in national security.
-
Torture tactics like waterboarding post-9/11 yielded no valuable information and were unproductive.
-
Success in interrogation relies on building rapport rather than aggressive tactics.
Share This Summary π
Explore More Summaries from Big Think π





