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

reply to post by DGFenrir


Real life isn't an episode of 24.

As much as the federal government would have you believe, any exercise in asking the public what they would do in such a scenario, is simply nothing more than a psychological mind-game. For the sole purpose of rendering the populace apathetic and willfully insane.

I am laughing at the people in this thread who are playing "tough guy" and basically saying "Yeah I could do it, no problem!!"

The truth is that unless you are a sociopath, you are going to have trouble going through with this. It would be something you have to live with for the rest of your life. Most people would not be able to live with the guilt of killing innocents and they end up taking their lives.

This is why some soldiers come back from wars in a poor mental state. What a man has to do in war causes his conscience to literally kill him (unless he is a sociopath).

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by DGFenrir

 

Real life isn't an episode of 24.

I know
That's why I said:

If there is even a tiniest chance to stop him then it has to be taken

and

War is not for the faint of heart.

The human mind is very fragile.

Given your scenario,
and he is in custody, and I have his family members as well,

he would be put to the test of his determination and will,
he would either talk, and talk very quickly,or he would look into each of his family members eyes, inches away from them, as they were 'engaged' in rising levels of informational assistance release procedures.
If I'm a sociopath for making the call, to do something needing done that one would never 'want' to do,
then so be it.
No, I will not go into detail,
THAT would just truly be sick.

Killing the family would be counter-productive. The 'terrorist' seeks martyrdom and to kill his family confers equal status to them.

There are other strategies that might minimise lose of life and render the goal and intent of the terror null and void.

I might attempt to coerse him by pointing out to the 'terrorist' that I will not permit his family to be physically harmed but could destroy their reputations in their own communities and that I would ensure that his parents were told he had denied his heritage and embraced the ideology that most opposed their own.

Explanation: This entire thread breaches this specific T&C... [yes I know I S&F! ]

15a) Offensive Content: You will not Post forum posts, private messages, PODcasts, blog entries, videos, images, and other supported content, links to images or use avatars and/or signatures that are unlawful, harassing, libelous, privacy invading, abusive, threatening, harmful, hateful, vulgar, obscene, and/or disruptive. You will not use text, images, avatars or link to images or domains that contain gore, mutilation, pornography or illegal content. Doing so will result in removal of your Post(s) and immediate termination of your account.

In other words this entire subject is not just Unthinkable but also unpostable and we should all be ashamed!

Personal Disclosure: I am not ashamed as I am a monster... its you humans who have that capacity!

P.S. I have made a thread alert!

Edited to add....

ob·scene (b-sn, b-)
adj.
1. Offensive to accepted standards of decency or modesty.
2. Inciting lustful feelings; lewd.
3. Repulsive; disgusting: "The way he writes about the disease that killed her is simply obscene" (Michael Korda).
4. So large in amount as to be objectionable or outrageous: "local merchants in nearby stores get hammered by stratospheric rents and obscene taxes" (Joe Queenan).

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

[Latin obscnus.]

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

ob·scenely adv.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

reply to post by Hawkman1967


Imagine that just after seeing his face as his wife's corpse hits the floor you receive a phone call on your phone that your family has been kidnapped by one of the terrorist's associates. If the terrorist does not reply by a certain time frame, your whole family will be killed. As you look into the eyes of the terrorists before you, would you expect this terrorist to show you mercy by listening to what you had to say first?

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


This is rather a pointless exercise and not even a reasonable plot for a ridiculous plot for a program like 24. The problem with fanatics is that if they are true believers, if the cause is what matters, torture even of family wouldn't matter. This is what makes true believers so dangerous. But we don't have to go to such extremes to understand the true evil of any true believer...it doesn't matter what the cause may be. Once a person places ideology over people they are lost to a form of insanity. In this country a significant portion of the elected government are true believers in movement conservatism. I'm not talking about slime bags like Eric Cantor or Jone Boehner, men who would sell themselves to the highest bidder. There are many true believers who would just as soon see Americans starve to death as long as their personal libertarian ideals are followed. True believers are scary and the best thing we can do with them is to put them out of their misery as soon as possible.

yeah i would do the "unthinkable" its a matter of being logic...

reply to post by notsofast


So as I said there are no assurances and the whole scenario is a lose lose proposition. What becomes of anything is a simple emotional response, win or lose. There is no moral high ground here whatsoever.

__________________

Lol, this is like a drug deal gone bad then escalates into
revenge, I D I O T S !
Smart people would not be caught it this situation,
to begin with, period.

Two wrongs will NEVER make right, no matter how you
manipulate things. (only a psychopath wouldn't understand this)
As for acting to save multiple lives ? . . . Katrina comes to mind.
Sad to know that withholding funding for infrastructure was
more important than human life.
but then sensibility is lost when :
STATS 1 : 5

___________________

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


Hollywood is so much BS it is amazing. In this scenario the solution is to evacuate the city. But the sensationalist way of justifying torture against terrorists is disgusting. The slitting of this man's wife's throat is appalling and in no way can be cast in a necessary light. This shouldnt need an explanation.

if i was to torture this person, i assure you he would talk. and i would have no problem torturing his family in front of him either. and once i found the weapons, i would strap them all to them and watch them all detonate while eating popcorn and a nice big glass of ice tea.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

My first response was: "Oh heck no! I could never be that monstrous!". And then I thought about it. I would do it. And eat a bullet afterwards.

Whilst I would not take any enjoyment from the act I certainly would not eat a bullet afterwards.

Who is to say that that child's life is more important than the hundreds of children that are going to die in the bomb blasts?

It is a tough situation but I would do it. For want of a better phrase, the ends justifies the means and if saving thousands, tens of thousands perhaps, means having to take one innocent life then I believe that the odds are worth it.

It is however a slippery slope that we tread on if we were to take such action against an innocent. The bottom of the slop could be a very, very horrible place to be in.

When confronted by an extreme situation, and forced to make an either/or choice between solution 1 and solution 2, the correct response is always solution 3, 4 or 5.


The trouble with posters in this thread is not so much their lack of morality as their lack of imagination.

- And I suspect a few are salivating over the idea of having an excuse to torture women and children.

Fact is that torture techniques have been used forever and they do work. A fanatic who smuggles dirty bombs into your country will not be afraid of your legal system's legal punishments. Prison? pfft.. That's a hotel. Death penalty.. Quick and painless death. Very scary stuff indeed.. Might as well just let the terrorist go.

Nice social experiment btw. I must take some notes.

You can't really say what you would do unless you were actually in the situation or if you've at least seen the movie. I honestly don't know if I could hurt kids but I would make it look like I would. In the movie I believe they exhausted every other avenue. They tried every thing they could and the time was getting to the point of desperation. Even the people that say no way would be frustrated and panic as that time moved on. That was the whole idea of the movie. You could see the good cop wanting to do bad things and Samuel Jackson didn't really enjoy what he was doing. He was trained to do it and actually tried not to. Another movie you could think about is Hostel 2. Two guys fly to Serbia to buy girls and kill them. The guy that is the most excited was all pumped up and excited but when it came time to do it he couldn't. The other guy that was unsure about it went in the room and turned psycho. You never truly know what you'd do til you are there. I can turn my back to many things in life because I honestly feel there is little to fight over, life's too short. I've outgrown that time of my life. However if the safety of my wife and kids were on the line I believe I'd be an animal and could do many very bad things.

Originally posted by kj6754
I am laughing at the people in this thread who are playing "tough guy" and basically saying "Yeah I could do it, no problem!!"

The truth is that unless you are a sociopath, you are going to have trouble going through with this. It would be something you have to live with for the rest of your life. Most people would not be able to live with the guilt of killing innocents and they end up taking their lives.

This is why some soldiers come back from wars in a poor mental state. What a man has to do in war causes his conscience to literally kill him (unless he is a sociopath).

Awful lot of macho bullsh...being thrown about here
I certainly couldn't cut his kids fingers off: to maim somebody in the most painful way possible is just evil.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


hell yes i'd do it. even if it doesn't work out, i would be in no way "on his level." my actions would be committed to save countless lives. if it was limited to torture, i'd have no moral delimna at all (unless i' failed, then i'd regret not torturing him more painfully to get the info).