We can often see in war-themed film and television dramas that after some people are captured by the enemy, they will not betray their own intelligence under severe torture, and some people may have thought wide-eyedly, why do these people have to be so real, and it is not enough to make up a false intelligence? Especially in the face of all kinds of inhuman punishment, after all, that kind of crime is not something that ordinary people can bear, if you can deceive the enemy with lies, won't you be able to save your life?
If you think so, it's really too young. In this case, it is useless for the captives to simply pretend to concede defeat and shout surrender, because the interrogators do not want the captives to submit to a soft statement, but reliable information. The interrogator is not a fool, he will set traps in his words, will make comprehensive analysis based on existing intelligence, and will repeatedly interrogate, and if the captive is made up, it is easy to be recognized. The enemy has many means, there are no enemies who you can't think of, physically, psychologically, mentally, and all kinds of means to break the defense line of the captured and pry their mouths open.
Even if you can't stand the torture and tell the truth, do you think the end will be good? In times of war, the enemy will generally kill that person after obtaining intelligence, because if you would rather die than yield, then the enemy will naturally be merciless! If the surrender is successful, there will not be many people who really surrender, but more will choose to lurk inside the enemy, and the enemy does not need that kind of wall grass. And for the country where the captives are located, it usually does not take the trouble to rescue a few people, such as the United States, in the process of years of conquest, only redeems one soldier, and the lives and deaths of other captives are not considered, leaving them to fend for themselves.
The Soviet Union had a very low tolerance for soldiers who surrendered to the enemy, and their attitude became very resolute and cold when faced with soldiers captured by the enemy. At that time, the Soviet Union's requirements for soldiers were very strict, and ordinary soldiers only had two ways to go, the first was to rush to the end to win, and the second was to leave their lives on the battlefield in the process of rushing to the end. If the soldiers were unfortunate enough to be captured, the Soviet Union would unconditionally give up the lives of those soldiers. Surrender to the enemy and be captured is not allowed to exist in the USSR at all, and in their military law it is stipulated that if anyone dares to surrender to the enemy, it is a capital offense of shooting. In times of war, captivity is the norm in war. Intolerant captives are not necessarily inhumane. Dealing with prisoners of war is a very contradictory thing, and the army is sometimes like this, prisoners and war heroes coexist, and under the contrast between the two, you are not allowed to be vague.