SERE versus Torture

So I posted this on another forum (more academic, not super military friendly) a while back... might as well see if there's any input here. The article I reacted against:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Out of the many, many service members that go through a military training, will you encounter the occasional individual who thinks it was ‘messed up’ on some level? Of course. Now I’m not one to rely on counting heads to determine right or wrong, yet I do think it serves as an indicator. Having been through SERE-C, my own experience is similar to the many others I know who have been through it as well: The best training we’ve ever received that we never want to do again. Not only do I believe the training was fair, it was valuable, and I take exception to some of the comments Mr. Morris makes in his misleading article. First I will give a more balanced description of SERE training, then give my brief account, and finally address some bad reasoning from the author.

To say that SERE is a repository of the world’s torture knowledge is a laughably ridiculous statement that instantly reveals a hyperbolic and naïve understanding of the world. From Wikipedia: “SERE is a military acronym for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape, a program that provides military personnel, Department of Defense civilians and private military contractors with training in evading capture, survival skills and the military code of conduct. Established by the United States Air Force at the end of the Korean War (1950–53), it was extended during the Vietnam War (1959–75) to the Army, Navy and Marines. Most higher level SERE students are military aircrew and special operations personnel considered to be at high risk of capture.” It’s a combination of classroom and field exercise designed to help people operate in an extremely hostile environment, so very high levels of physical and mental exertion, disorientation, and pain are used to (as realistically as possible) simulate the harsh conditions that are often encountered. That said, there is no singular “focus” on torturing trainees and certainly not any training on how to torture someone whatsoever. Believing those things indicates to me either an existing psychological glitch, or at a minimum, a perspective so skewed that it’s not based on the facts of reality.

I will mention some generalities about the school, but will not give away training-specific details since that would be in violation of the non-disclosure agreement I signed and the oath I took. This “secretive” nature of SERE the author belabors as a sinister plot is simply to keep new trainees from knowing what to expect, as that would substantially degrade the training. I spent 21 days of hell/SERE at Fort Rucker in an intense and hands-on training with pretty realistic scenarios. Some of that realism stems from the physical stressors like exhaustion, food and sleep deprivation, etc, but the mental stressors are perhaps even more debilitating… and I’ll just leave it at that. All the instructors there were amazing role-players and very professional. SERE was a real bitch, and some of the best training I’ve ever had. A big reason so many people feel the same way is because (unlike some military training) it’s actual viewed as useful… even necessary. In today’s operational environment and asymmetrical battlespace, the risk of capture is higher than ever, and SERE covers several types of captivity besides POW status.

Morris states in the article, “The experience of torture at SERE surely plays a role in the minds of the graduates who go on to be interrogators, and it must on some level help them rationalize their actions. It's not hard to imagine them thinking, Well, if I survived this, then it's OK to do it to this guy. This acceptance of abuse from up high down to the lowest levels is the root of our military's torture problem.” The bold parts are not just wild assumptions but are also the complete opposite of what is actually taught. The whole framework for the course is built upon the notion of ‘Return With Honor’ and driving home the ethical and legal responsibilities of Americans that find themselves in the worst of situations. Besides, only a tiny fraction of SERE graduates will become interrogators, and most interrogators have never been to SERE. By trying to make these tenuous connections, its apparent Mr. Morris lacks any real knowledge of how these things work and is writing a hit piece based off a spurious agenda.

 

??? Nice. Not sure what you want to say here. You want to kill people or you want to save your soul?

 

It's my response to the article linked. The article basically bad mouths SERE, I defend it.

 

I never went to SERE or any of the more elite training the military has to offer. I didn't particularly enjoy BNOC, and I especially disliked being the EO rep for the unit and that school. The military has a unique way of making things that could be fun suck.

Like you said, there's always some dude whining, "They can't do this to us, I want to see the chaplain. "

Although I may not have enjoyed myself, I could always see the usefulness of the training and just sucked it up and got through it. Apparently, this fellow was deeply offended by the level of training he received and is taking his whining up a notch.

You went through SERE-C and found it to be a useful learning experience. So long as most of the attendees come away with a better understanding of the realities of capture by an enemy and all it entails, I would agree that it is a valuable training program.

 

Eye for an eye...those opposing America and what it stands for arent going to feel one bit of emotion when they torture our troops...Its important for the brave Americans that could be captured, held prisoner and tortured to know what they are up against. If we need torture to gain valuable and needed information from our enemies then so be it.