The "common goal" is simply obtaining intelligence information through human communications.Originally Posted by Outlaw 7
Strategic debriefing and interrogation are separated for very logical reasons, one simply being that roughly 80% or more of those who are trained as interrogators will never hold a strategic debriefing position during their military careers. And many of those who attend the DoD Strategic Debriefing course are not trained as interrogators (When I attended - in the days before computers - more than half the class was not interrogation trained). And (as I have stated before) although the skill sets are very similar the context of the conduct of interrogation vs strat debrief is very different. I know of outstanding interrogators who make great strat debriefers - but also of those who excel at extracting info from detainees yet who are lousy with willing strategic sources. The opposite is also true - in fact, more often than the former. I know of many highly successful strat debriefers who've spent a majority of their career in the strat debrief world who were later forced by DA into a tactical interrogation assignment as a senior NCO/Warrant who then failed miserably because they could not adapt.
Sorry, both Strategic Debriefing (ASI) and Interrogation (MOS) have been around since long before '73. And 96Cs - the old interrogator MOS code - were also doing strategic debriefings before then.Originally Posted by Outlaw7
Also, in your first post you spoke of the developer of "spiral questioning" in the third person, as if it were someone else....
....but now you are stating that it is your creation.Originally Posted by Outlaw7
And this is nothing new or revolutionary:Originally Posted by Outlaw7
So, I have to ask - what is your point?Originally Posted by Outlaw 7
And to bring up the subject of statement analysis:
You could tell us more about that........before I was stopped from further NTC training.
Bookmarks