"Unthinkable": What would you do? Could you do the "Unthinkable"?

reply to post by notsofast


To speak soo many absolutes about a situation you have never encountered.... All well. It's not exactly a surpise. Do you truly know the mind of a monster that would do such things? I don't think any of truly do. Yet soo many claim they do.

Writing someone off for dead. Especially a loved one. Is not the same as being forced to watch them die painfully. Sorry. It's just not.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


I am a soldier in the Army. I would put a bullet into his wife's head before I ever asked anything. Then bring the kids in and start asking questions.

reply to post by Hawkman1967


That's pretty much what happens. Though it wasn't planned that way. And he slashed her throat.

Yeah, that crap that gets your heart pumping is for '24' fans (like icycle dick cheney). In reality, that stuff does NOT work.
Take it from a professional interegator

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


The situation. Torture is illegal under US law and International treaty obligations. No terrorist attacks have been prevented as a result of torture but you need to justify its usage. You're a neocon who hypocritically espouses the virtues of the Constitution while at the same advocating that it be suspended arbitrarily when its protected liberties become inconvenient.

Solution: Propose a completely unrealistic scenario in which a single individual just happens to have personally acquired and distributed multiple nuclear bombs all over the US. You begin with the flawed premise that information provided under coercion is presumed to be accurate when in fact the contrary is more likely.

This individual was also captured magically between the time he planted all the bombs and their detonation. Even though a nuclear bomb necessarily requires strictly controlled ingredients, such as enriched uranium, this person found some on the ground and so there's no need to look for coconspirators. UAVs with radiation detectors don't exist for some reason and you have no ground forces to sweep the streets with Geiger counters because I don't know.

Do you believe the statements provided in response to torture, dedicating precious manpower and time to following up on them, or do you actually conduct a real investigation and search to find the bombs using proven science and legitimate law enforcement techniques?

Originally posted by Hawkman1967
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

 

I am a soldier in the Army. I would put a bullet into his wife's head before I ever asked anything. Then bring the kids in and start asking questions.

Apparently, your oath to protect and defend the Constitution was completely meaningless to you. If you're willing to start executing innocent civilians, you don't deserve to be wearing that uniform. How exactly are you better than the guy with the bomb also threatening to murder innocent civilians?

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

Why would you want to stop them?

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
What would you do? Torture and perhaps harm his children in an effort to save perhaps millions of men, women and children? Or let them die? Would you do the unthinkable?

The need of the many, outweigh the need of the few. A belief I hold firm. In this situation, there's not much I wouldn't do. Torture? I'll pry his fingernails out myself if needed. Harm his children? That's probably where I'd stop. You can make it look like you have/are harming his children. No real need to actually go there.

But if a single man, is threatening countless innocent lives with a nuclear device, then the need of the many outweigh this mans needs. He gave up on certain rights when he decided to unleash nuclear holocaust upon us.

That's just my opinion and believe me, my opinions usually aren't good ones.

Only 10% of the cargo containers coming into America get checked.

Anyone from any country can freely walk across our southern border carrying a nuclear bomb in a wheelbarrow or towing it with an atv.

Since our Government has no inclination to secure us from such a threat, God knows how many nuclear weapons other countries already have hid in our land.

Your theory about torturing the guys wife and kids to get the bad guy to stop wouldn't work. Other cultures have more respect for their goats than their wives and wouldn't care if you killed one of their wives. Arabs for example have many wives. Doubt they'd care much.

Not one person in this thread has mentioned Jack Bauer. As soon as I read the OP last night, I thought of Jack Bauer. Jack Bauer would know what to do. Jack Bauer would cut the kid's fingers off if necessary. Jack Bauer is a real American Badass.

Bring in a team from hollywood. Make it look like we're torturing and killing his family. But not actually do it. Just, special effects.

Get the info, his family is safe, and thousands are spared all without actually hurting anyone.

Originally posted by enigma91
Bring in a team from hollywood. Make it look like we're torturing and killing his family. But not actually do it. Just, special effects.

Get the info, his family is safe, and thousands are spared all without actually hurting anyone.

Jack Bauer already did that- it works. I don't remember what Day it was.

Choice A: I offer him milk and cookies. He doesn't talk. His family lives, millions die, lots of nuclear fallout and crap, terrorist goes to prison unharmed, everyone starts bashing the evil government because they didn't do anything to stop the attacks.

Choice B: I torture him and his family. His wife dies, millions are saved. When people hear about this the government will be "a" hero and the conspiracy theorists will think it was a false flag.

I would go with B.
Would I care about the morals? Umm.. No. I'm a black-ops agent after all. Why would I care about that stuff? My line of work is all about the results and not any personal #.

I would place each of his family members at the city center of the most likely targets. I would not tell him which cities, just that each was likely to be a victim of his insanity. If that wouldn't make him talk, then I doubt anything would. If he is willing to play Russian roulette with his own family, I doubt torturing them would be as helpful as torturing him directly.

This is such a dull, backwards argument.

I remember this "exact" scenario being cast around by talk-show hosts and comedians, etc. when the PATRIOT Act was "introduced", and legalized torture was in our midst. It wasn't funny or plausible then, and it isn't now.

Someone like that, a person smuggling dirty bombs to extinguish hundreds of thousands of lives, would probably not have a family to begin with. There isn't even a guarantee, at all, that you could get some kind of confession or intel to "disarm the nukes", "in the last second" like some stupid Bond plot.

All it does is validate the reason why there is a supposed terrorist event in the first place. Any kind of 'state' that openly condones such barbaric acts deserves to have it's population destroyed. It's what the US does after all, or at least this is what I hear from American neanderthals saying we should "turn the middle-east into glass" whenever they hear of a stoning. Guess they don't care about all the CIA and Spec Op "black sites", detainment/torture facilities that already exist. Guess that's not as barbaric as a stoning hm.

It's amazing how dull the average person's perception is compared to how the real world actually functions. It is staggering how apathetic and lethargic people can become with such insane arguments and proposals.

I saw that movie, if that situation were to arise. I would say "yes you can h ave your family back" *bring his family*

ask him the locations of the bombs, if he did not comply excute his wife, then i will ask again, if he does not comply excute one (out of two) children. if he continues to not comply, i will torture, his last child, he will beg me to put his son out of his misery, i will not comply untill MY demands are met, then i will be given the location of the bombs, then excute the remaining child and the suspect.

I would not feel guilty (as horrible as that sounds) it might strike to me once and again saying i could have handled it better, but logically the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, my actions are logical, and cannot be judged.

I wouldt feel sorry for him or his family. If I had to torture/kill his every kin I would. Destroy the life of few to sav thousands. he obviously doesn't care about any of our families

Originally posted by SyphonX
Someone like that, a person smuggling dirty bombs to extinguish hundreds of thousands of lives, would probably not have a family to begin with. There isn't even a guarantee, at all, that you could get some kind of confession or intel to "disarm the nukes", "in the last second" like some stupid Bond plot.

Hence why nobody negotiates with terrorists.
His only goal is to destroy the target. If there is even a tiniest chance to stop him then it has to be taken. 1 000 000 vs 1 000 003 lost is not that big of a difference. If you think it's wrong then try telling that to the man who is a bout to blow up a couple of million people. War is not for the faint of heart.