Please don't shout at terrorist suspects.Thank you.

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Well if we can't gather intelligence due to these laws that have been passed then I'm sure that after a few more atrocities on home soil the politicians may act and scrap these laws.
In the meantime just abide by the rules and bingo you just turn round and say to the government of the day, well you get the intelligence you deserve.

It's a waste of time getting het up about these things and it's bad for your blood pressure. Now pull up a bean bag!
 
This is only a problem if the bodies are discovered.
Allegedly.
 
'Suspects' being the operative word.

Many of the people we lifted in Basra were innocent civvies who'd been dragged from their beds because the enemy decided to use their roof as a firing point or whatever.
 
After 3 consecutive hours of pouring water over Abdul's head in the interrogation room, MI5 realized that they were getting nowhere.

Nothing could wash the smell of sweat and onion bhajis away.
 
As usual, the media has only painted part of the picture. For many years the questioning of terrorist suspect has to be done be a tactical questioner. These are usually military provost service soldiers. There are a distinct number of advantages to this rather than leaving it to your average infanteer - its a bit hard getting a suspects name out of him if the questioner struggles with their own name.

its a none story used to fill column space.
 
Aren't interrogators normally int corps?

Also, if a prisoner is likely to have information about enemy strength, firing positions, IED placements, etc. they'll be quizzed on the spot by whoever happens to be there - normally an infanteer.
 
Therein lies a problem - someone whose just lost a mate to sniper from the roof of the house he's found young Achmed skulking in, is going to be under a lot of pressure to stay calm, collected, express values and standards and all that rather than chin the bloke. Its better if its handled by someone else who's isn't quite as effed off and knows what they are looking for.
 

mercurydancer

LE
Book Reviewer
Aren't interrogators normally int corps?

Also, if a prisoner is likely to have information about enemy strength, firing positions, IED placements, etc. they'll be quizzed on the spot by whoever happens to be there - normally an infanteer.
That is a reality of warfare and will never stop. Question of judgement for the man on the spot. The infanteer needs then to know when he needs to hand the prisoner over for further questioning. This of course needs good leadership.
 
One of the consistent themes of our two recent military adventures is how we managed to turn the locals against us through picking up innocent locals and treating them like the regimes we claim to be better than. See the Baha Mousa enquiry for the details of just how incompetent, arrogant, ignorant and unprofessional the Army was. That directly fuelled support for the opposition and got soldiers killed. That said, I do sympathise with the soldiers at the sharp end - badly trained, badly lead and when things go to court abandoned completely by the system that dumped them in it.

Indeed, if beating the crap out of the locals resulted in direct benefits, saved lives and so on we'd be seeing a stream of stories detailing the same to counter stories such as this. But we don't, because all it did was get more of us killed.

This war is one of ideology, of information and of narrative. Our enemy seeks to convince the population that must be influenced to achieve victory that the West believes that human rights, the rule of law and democracy are for white people only. Brown people get arbitrary beatings, drone strikes, extraordinary rendition and no say in how they are governed.

Far too many posters on this thread seek to support our enemy by acting as they want us to.
 
I think the enemy would rather we did nothing and sat like turkeys on the conveyor belt.
 
Aren't interrogators normally int corps?

Also, if a prisoner is likely to have information about enemy strength, firing positions, IED placements, etc. they'll be quizzed on the spot by whoever happens to be there - normally an infanteer.
The last time I was involved was 2009, at that time it was MPS who provided the main stay of tactical questioners, the reason is two fold - proper prisoner handling and they spend the longest with the suspect, so have time to develop the questioning and a rapport.

On the spot questioning isn't done, unless a tactical questioner is on the spot, prisoners have to be handled in a specific way and passed upwards through the int grinder.
 
On the spot questioning isn't done, unless a tactical questioner is on the spot, prisoners have to be handled in a specific way and passed upwards through the int grinder.
Obviously the infantry shouldn't be carrying out interrogations - but asking "have you seen the enemy?", "did they run through your house?" etc. is just common sense and happens all the time - unless it's changed since I left.
 
Obviously the infantry shouldn't be carrying out interrogations - but asking "have you seen the enemy?", "did they run through your house?" etc. is just common sense and happens all the time - unless it's changed since I left.
Can't be done. Prisoner handling and questioning is very strict now.
 

X59

LE
I think the enemy would rather we did nothing and sat like turkeys on the conveyor belt.
It may come as a surprise but we're only incidental to what the enemy wants. He wants his local population to support him much more than he wants anything from us.

That's why we shouldn't help him out.
 

Latest Threads

Top