November 01, 2010

Picture the following scenario:

You are the President of the United States of America.



One day, you were happily doing your job when your phone rang. You felt a slight shudder when you picked up the receiver.



Your hunch was correct. It was a bad call.



But hey, you're the American President. You have got to do something.



So having taken care of the first order of business, which is to show them whose the boss, you need to get down to serious business; how to save 3 American cities from being toasted by 3 dirty bombs planted by a terrorist.

Naturally, you don't want to deal with this alone. You can't anyway. So, you summoned the baddest badasses in your administration to your office to discuss a plausible solution to the threat.



But this is a national crisis. If any President can come up with a solution simply by gathering all his aides and asking them to think of one, heck even I can be President - of Earth. So while you guys are drinking and discussing, the bombs are ticking away in three undisclosed locations in three American cities across the continental US and A!

As the man on the top who has to be responsible if anything happens, you get inevitably stressed and starts to have funny ideas.



Then suddenly, you saw light.



The terrorist surrendered himself to the FBI. You must be confounded by the actions of the terrorist but who cares. You've got only three days left before the three bombs explode and vaporize three American cities from the face of Earth. The terrorist is willing to disclose the location of the bombs but only if his demands are met.

Americans DO NOT negotiate with terrorists. The President is no exception. Besides, his demands are ridiculous.



Time is running out. Either you solve the damn problem or you are going down in history as the President who couldn't do a thing to save three American cities from one terrorist. Yeah, real life choices sucks. But you still got to make one anyway. You've tried tempting the terrorist with money (only to take the money back and put a bullet through his brain after getting the bomb's locations), tempting him with lust (he circumcised too much of his ahem during a surgery) and talking to him nicely (he thinks you're retarded).

So, what else can you possibly do to make him talk?



Oh yeah baby, are you thinking what I am thinking =D
If you do a clean job of it, nobody else will know!

You must be thinking HELL NO! That is inhumane. Besides, my country does not condone any violation against human rights! We are the Big Brother of Earth. We can't go around flouting rules that we have set just because we feel like it (although we could). The United States is the Land of the Free!



Yeah. Sure. Stick to your principles and ideals. If you can't get the terrorist to talk, 3 days later, 3 American cities will be gone. We are talking about the destruction of a few millions lives. The psychological impact on the rest of the nation. The morale booster for the enemy. The criticism of the United States government's incapability by the world. Your job.

So, do you still feel like standing on the moral high ground?

That, is the premise of "Unthinkable".



This psychological thriller highlights an important aspect of today's delicate political arena; is it alright to torture when all else fails?

People like me shouldn't be unfamiliar with the term 'torture'. It is the intentional causing of extreme bodily pain to another person, whether for fun or for business, like in the movie plot depicted above.

Most people find the idea of torturing another person revolting and barbaric, which is probably why we have an Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations.



Yes, I have to agree that torturing is bad. It is not nice to hurt another person. My mom says we should all play nice with others. BUT, if there is sufficient reason, I believe it is alright to do so. And it has to be the last resort. After all, extreme situations call for extreme measures.

Think about the above plot. Its like 10 million of YOUR citizens' lives against one lone terrorist who is bent on wrecking havoc in the world.

The choice is obvious. To me at least.

And lets face reality. Do you seriously believe that every nation in the world abides strictly to all the rules created by the United Nations? Will you follow all your school rules or other rules in your life?

Furthermore, terrorists are not your conventional kind of enemies. They are unconventional enemies who doesn't fight head-on but instead, choose to strike from the dark and their targets are un-armed, un-trained and to some extent, un-fit civilians who have as much chance to retaliate as a chicken on the chopping board. How chivalrous is that?



And then there is the issue with torture generating bad information where the person being tortured might just lie in order to stop the torture. That may be true, but considering that you've got everything to lose while he doesn't, having any kind of information is better than no information. There's a 50-50 chance that he might be telling the truth too. Besides, more torture can be used to verify the information.


Ok, lets start with his finger. Hmm ain't working.


His ahem. Shit, still ain't talking.


Then kill his wife in front of him. WHAT?


Next to go will be his children. Oh his finally talking. But I shall just continue to verify if his lying!

OK enough with the nonsense.

At the end of the day, everybody's measure of morality is different.

Does the end justifies the means?

No comments: