I'm curious to know how people hold up when they are subjected to different forms of mental and physical tortures over a long period of time. At what point would you really know if you have broken the individuals will completely? What would be the signs?
I will research this independantly but I like to see what others find. I like to expand on their thoughts. I am curious how different personality types would percieve torture and which methods are most affective on each personality type
The grooming or trust building behavior is typical and effective for children and teenagers and vulnerable adults. Isolation and control, berating and belittling, rebuilding etc. It's standard for abusive lovers/ spouses. If you're effective enough of an abuser, you don't have to lift a finger to intimidate, break and control a person.
by MachineI'm curious to know how people hold up when they are subjected to different forms of mental and physical tortures over a long period of time. At what point would you really know if you have broken the individuals will completely? What would be the signs?
Begging for mercy and loss of hope are pretty sure signs.
Another sure sign is the creation of defense mechanisms to hide insecurities.
Fnding specific weaknesses and exploiting them is probably the most affective means to apply torture.
Some personality types seem immune to torture. But the moment you grab their wife or kid... they'll tell you anything you want to know. This is especially affective if they cannot see your interaction with their loved one. You can literally take their loved one out of their sight and they instantly start freaking out. Willing to tell you everything... if you let their family go.
Interesting. It's the same tactic Saddam used to gain favor with the es and his Sunni people. Terrorists are willing to commit suicide to kill you but the loss of their loved ones is too much to bare. So technically the best way to fight a terrorist is to let them know that if they attack you... you will kill their family.
Example: a terrorist commits a suicide bombing against Americans. In return the US blows up and kills everyone from his villiage. Everything he has fought for and loves is dead. But more importantly... the other terrorists from other factions realize that the US will commit genocideagainst everyone they love if they attack the US.
It's the theory from Swordfish. Hit your enemy with retaliation so severe that even the thought of attacking the US would give them nightmares. The most affective way to neutralize a warrior culture that are willing to die for their whatever... is to nuke them. Tale away any chance or hope of victory.
The Japanese are a warrior culture ready to die for what they believe in. Probably a close mentality of Afghans. But once the Japanese faced genocide they realized it was over and surrendered. Therefore the best course of action in Afghanistan is a tactical nuclear strike against major population sources found to spawn territisum.
Those who lose everything will continue to fight but those who haven't... and could watch their family and home village of however many years get destroyed... those people will seek peace.
After 911 the world was afraid of the US response. They feared our nuclear fire as we have used it before. I believe the US image has grown soft over the years and a demonstration of our power would bring about a better peace. People are more likely to listen to you if failed negotiations result in the death of everyone they love.
I acknowledge that it sounds inhumane but in actual application.. a nuclear strike would save many more lives than it would take. It's actually more humane to nuke a few thousand people than suffer a decade long war which causes the suffering of millions. The Greek Goddess (The Virgin Mother) Athena would agree as her philosophy was that it is better to have conflict than to allow issues to persist. Don't insult Athena either. Thats where the Virgin Mary concept was spawned... from Athena. Who happens to be 4000 years older than the Bible.
Another sidenote. Isn't it time we updated the stories in the Bible to reflect a more reasonable chain of events? Greek mythology updated it's stories to stay with the times. IMO thats why the Bible is unbelievable to most people. The stories are too unbelievable. Example is the Jews running from Egyptians and the sea parted. You sure it just wasn't a season of unordinary low tide and the Jews just walked through? That makes more sense. Then a few days later as the Egyptians tried the same voyage.. the water started coming back in.. and it started raining real hard. Thena broke and flooded the area with water again... or some crap. Thats more believable than sons old drunk holding a stick in the air and the oceans parting. Sounds like a dramatic lie or more likely an extrodinary exageration of the truth. Cause thats what storytellers do. They exagerate events to make them seem more dramatic and interesting.