Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2HRS

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by topherman420

Originally posted by ludshed
I thought 24 ended? Another season?


No it's the movie Unthinkable with Samuel L Jackson. Not a bad movie either.

Im curious as to what this experiment by the OP is going to accomplish. Whats the goal OP? Sounds like an intriguing start of a thread.
edit on 13-10-2011 by topherman420 because: grammar gremlin made me do it


That movie actually seemed like propaganda to me. I don't mean that in an ignorant way. Just that after I watched it, it had no worth as a piece of art. The goal seemed to deliver a message only.

I must agree,the ending was as stupid as endings get in a movie,lol




posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by LogiosHermes27
 



As a neutral supporter of both parties I presume, do you think the killing last week by Obama was justified?


If you play with fire I guess you should expect to get burnt.

If you decide to spew a diatribe of hatred towards the country you once called home and were behind any terrorist attacks against said country, what could you honestly expect?

Or is the U.S now in the business of killing innocent citizens, fabricating stories about them and glorying in their demise? Or have they always been in this business?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus

Originally posted by LogiosHermes27

Would you make a decision to torture him…not only him, but if it comes down to it to save 40million Americans, his children, his wife and his mother?

12PM SEPTEMBER 11,2012

You have 2 hours to make a decision, what will your decision be?


Torture is notoriously unreliable to begin with. And evil will always beget evil. So there would be no torture going on if I could make the decision.

Torture is simply not an acceptable option in any case.

Its really not a difficult decision to make. Basically it comes down the individuals principles that they live by, and specifically those whose principles are to not torture, and challenging them, tempting them, to give in and betray those principles for a reward; in this case, a small chance that some pertinent information would be released to supposedly save 40M lives.

Basically, its the "would you sell your soul if the price was high enough?" question.

My answer to that question, and to the quandary of would I betray my principles if the pay out was high enough, is always going to be NO. My principles are not up for sale or trade.
edit on 10/13/2011 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)

Tough question( I don't personally believe we should haveever crossed that threshold as a nation.): I applaud your sense of "principle.

The other 39,999,9999 of "us"are already calling for YOU to receive the first bullet.to get out of the way. Is one man's sense of principle worth 40million others lives?
hmmmmm Thought provoking. Sometimes adults have to do tough things.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by StarfireZeta
Just use the most effective truth drug to get confessional information from the captured enemy.


I like that! So much, that I edited it into my "Choose Your Own Adventure" ending. Hope you don't mind!!



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by grumpydaysleeper
reply to post by LogiosHermes27
 


The constitution is important, and this is definitely not an easy question to answer,
but what about all the children who will die?


So what will be your decision if you was guranteed that he will talk if tortured?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by LogiosHermes27
 



Nah, you're baiting. We've seen it before. You're trying to justify why Barrack Obama decided to assassinate a U.S. citizen on foreign soil while having no weapons (especially uranium) in his possession at the time of the assassination. The guy should have had a trial under the rule of law, and that's that.

Your story is in NO way comparable anyway.
edit on 13-10-2011 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)


Your right,its not comparable by any means,so what would you do if this was to happen, would you not torture him?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogiosHermes27

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus

Originally posted by LogiosHermes27

Would you make a decision to torture him…not only him, but if it comes down to it to save 40million Americans, his children, his wife and his mother?

12PM SEPTEMBER 11,2012

You have 2 hours to make a decision, what will your decision be?


Torture is notoriously unreliable to begin with. And evil will always beget evil. So there would be no torture going on if I could make the decision.

Torture is simply not an acceptable option in any case.

Its really not a difficult decision to make. Basically it comes down the individuals principles that they live by, and specifically those whose principles are to not torture, and challenging them, tempting them, to give in and betray those principles for a reward; in this case, a small chance that some pertinent information would be released to supposedly save 40M lives.

Basically, its the "would you sell your soul if the price was high enough?" question.

My answer to that question, and to the quandary of would I betray my principles if the pay out was high enough, is always going to be NO. My principles are not up for sale or trade.
edit on 10/13/2011 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)

So because of principles you would let 40 million people die ?


My principles, specifically the "against torture" principles, are not up for sale or trade.

Thus, the specific temptation offered to me to betray those principles, is irrelevant.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
The OP has given a scenario and asked if I was in the oval office and had to make a choice, what would it be, and after come careful consideration, the following can be stated:

Based off of the information, I would demand that the rule of Law be followed. He would not be tortured, nor would I insist that we torture his family, rather that they be treated like any other person of interest in the US, to include that a full investigation be made, and that his rights be honored and upheld, no matter what, to include ensuring that he knew his Miranda rights, and then have him watched like a hawk.

When you respond to a potential terrorist threat or even react to one, you lose, as the terrorist want that kind of reaction. Espousing the very ideas of liberty and justice should be followed and examples made. While if they were able to find this person, and the evidence to produce for his guilt, then the officials should be clever enough to determine if there are 2 bombs and what cities they are in. To announce such would be forbidden and held on the quiet, as to prevent mass riots and panic in the streets of every major US city across the country and those who were of this mans faith would also suffer, even though they would be innocent.

However, as this is a credible threat, as the OP asked, then the next steps would be crucial. First would be to mobilize all military personnel in the US, deputizing them as federal marshal’s thus bypassing the laws that prohibit the use of military on US soil. I would then have FEMA get its forces ready, and proceed to set up a call center, calling the governors of all 50 states to be prepared to take in refugee’s from this event.

Having that ready, and in place, then it is a waiting game, as they would have to move fast, as it could be easy to figure out and backtrack, where this guy was, where he traveled to and from, thus narrowing down the list of states and cities. From there, it would be a matter of being prepared for the worst and ensuring that the trial went forward as planned, ultimately to determine his guilt or innocence in a court of law.

Should a bomb go off, and he states yes he did it, then he would have to go through the courts, and the evidence presented, along with all statements he made.

If we give up the rule of law, failing to protect the rights of one citizen, even those deemed murderous and ultimately unfit for society, then we would be no better than the terrorist that seek to destroy those rights for everyone.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Wookiep
 





Unless I read the OP wrong, I'm assuming the event hasn't happened yet. No-one dies, you lose


No, we know about it 2 hrs before SHTF. Do we:

A. Abide by the constitution(doing so would ensure everyones death since the perp is unwilling to tell and we cant force the info out of him)

B. Torture this sick puppy until he sings like a birdy(saving millions of lives)



Of course we'd do what we gotta do in that situation, it's pretty much a no brainier in that case, BUT..the OP is just using this to try and find a way to justify Barrack Obamas recent assassination, and the story in the OP isn't even close to it. That's it.

Nawww, just tying to see from the ats posters if this scenario fits under the 5th amendment, im trying to get a good view on peoples view so I can better understand how people think on both sides, that’s it.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by LogiosHermes27
 


Nope, I like the truth serum idea the best.
(thanks to "StarfireZeta") As for the rest? You already know, and if you don't then you either need to learn to read, or learn to not just *selectively* read.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by gwydionblack
 





Ultimately, people might die. Big deal to be honest. We all die and some things our outside of our control. I see no reason to have blood on even more hands than there was to begin with if it isn't going to mean much. The truth will come out in the end and those who were involved, if they acted in a moral and just way will be rewarded for such.


OOOOk,umm...and who do you support in the up and coming elections ?

The truth will come out in the end!!
When ! after 40 million people die?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus

Originally posted by LogiosHermes27

Would you make a decision to torture him…not only him, but if it comes down to it to save 40million Americans, his children, his wife and his mother?

12PM SEPTEMBER 11,2012

You have 2 hours to make a decision, what will your decision be?


Torture is notoriously unreliable to begin with. And evil will always beget evil. So there would be no torture going on if I could make the decision.

Torture is simply not an acceptable option in any case.

Its really not a difficult decision to make. Basically it comes down the individuals principles that they live by, and specifically those whose principles are to not torture, and challenging them, tempting them, to give in and betray those principles for a reward; in this case, a small chance that some pertinent information would be released to supposedly save 40M lives.

Basically, its the "would you sell your soul if the price was high enough?" question.

My answer to that question, and to the quandary of would I betray my principles if the pay out was high enough, is always going to be NO. My principles are not up for sale or trade.
edit on 10/13/2011 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)

Tough question( I don't personally believe we should haveever crossed that threshold as a nation.): I applaud your sense of "principle.

The other 39,999,9999 of "us"are already calling for YOU to receive the first bullet.to get out of the way. Is one man's sense of principle worth 40million others lives?
hmmmmm Thought provoking. Sometimes adults have to do tough things.


So Id be murdered for refusing to stoop to the wickedness of the enemy for an infinitesimal chance at the bad guy actually telling the truth IN TIME to stop the bombs? As I said, torture is notoriously unreliable. Thats a fact.

Hmmm.... I can live with that. Or rather, I can die with that, as the case may be.

Another point: if I was in office, and I administered by my principles, the chances of such a scenario ever arising is trivial to begin with, because Id have a much more isolationist policy, and wouldnt be meddling in other nations affairs, wouldnt have troops in foreign lands, wouldnt try to economically conquest other nations, etc. Basically, as we would be out of the middle easts face, the whole cliched propaganda of "CRAZY ARABS WANT TO DIRTY BOMB THE US!!!!1111!!one2 LIVE IN PERPETUAL FEAR AND HATE OF "THEM"!" would be a total non-issue, even more so than it is now.

In a perfect world of course. Im sure Id get killed by the those would stand to lose a profit by the US beginning to focus its intent inwards to improve itself rather than a focus on dominating other nations and subjugating its populace.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   
The world does not run on sunshine, rainbows and idealism. Principles of law have little sway when 40m lives are at stake. There comes a time when you have to choose between your idealistic notions and the cynicism that is reality.

When 40m lives are at stake and you choose to let them die for your "Principles"-then really, you shouldn't be in the position to make that choice in the first place.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
The world does not run on sunshine, rainbows and idealism. Principles of law have little sway when 40m lives are at stake. There comes a time when you have to choose between your idealistic notions and the cynicism that is reality.

When 40m lives are at stake and you choose to let them die for your "Principles"-then really, you shouldn't be in the position to make that choice in the first place.


Id have to disagree with that last line whole heartedly.

If a person is NOT a person who would stick by their principles, and is capable, even WILLING to waffle between sticking to and betraying those principles depending on whether its convenient or not, is not a person Id ever want to be making decisions in the first place for other people, and would be totally unfit to do so in the first place.

People like that are folks like Obama: lots of talk, but when it comes to action, theres no conviction and the strongest external force will be the deciding factor in whats get done, and what doesnt.

If I were ever to run in some hypothetical universe, an anti-torture stance would absolutely be made known to all. If I was elected in that hypothetical universe, those hypothetical people could expect me to stick by that stance, even if it got inconvenient to do so.

Id also like to reiterate that torture is unreliable. Basically folks disagree with my unwillingness to sell my soul for a lottery ticket, per se. If you WOULD, thats ok, but I wouldnt



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by CaticusMaximus
 


Well okay then. You let 40m people die. At least you have your idealism(which you dont have cause your dead too)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
The OP has given a scenario and asked if I was in the oval office and had to make a choice, what would it be, and after come careful consideration, the following can be stated:

Based off of the information, I would demand that the rule of Law be followed. He would not be tortured, nor would I insist that we torture his family, rather that they be treated like any other person of interest in the US, to include that a full investigation be made, and that his rights be honored and upheld, no matter what, to include ensuring that he knew his Miranda rights, and then have him watched like a hawk.

When you respond to a potential terrorist threat or even react to one, you lose, as the terrorist want that kind of reaction. Espousing the very ideas of liberty and justice should be followed and examples made. While if they were able to find this person, and the evidence to produce for his guilt, then the officials should be clever enough to determine if there are 2 bombs and what cities they are in. To announce such would be forbidden and held on the quiet, as to prevent mass riots and panic in the streets of every major US city across the country and those who were of this mans faith would also suffer, even though they would be innocent.

However, as this is a credible threat, as the OP asked, then the next steps would be crucial. First would be to mobilize all military personnel in the US, deputizing them as federal marshal’s thus bypassing the laws that prohibit the use of military on US soil. I would then have FEMA get its forces ready, and proceed to set up a call center, calling the governors of all 50 states to be prepared to take in refugee’s from this event.

Having that ready, and in place, then it is a waiting game, as they would have to move fast, as it could be easy to figure out and backtrack, where this guy was, where he traveled to and from, thus narrowing down the list of states and cities. From there, it would be a matter of being prepared for the worst and ensuring that the trial went forward as planned, ultimately to determine his guilt or innocence in a court of law.

Should a bomb go off, and he states yes he did it, then he would have to go through the courts, and the evidence presented, along with all statements he made.

If we give up the rule of law, failing to protect the rights of one citizen, even those deemed murderous and ultimately unfit for society, then we would be no better than the terrorist that seek to destroy those rights for everyone.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
After reading your…idea upon scenario thought, I just realized…lmaf, That 1 man controls the destiny of over three hundred million people on a daily basis as president…‘THAT’S FREAKING CRAZYYYYY!

Just imagine if that event was to happen for real, ‘’and your brain was in another president brain‘’, and he thought just as you thought.

Then 40 million people would have died over a simple piece of paper written in pen.

1 man just got 40 million people killed because of…‘laws, rights and amendments.

1 single man.

''Then they will most defiantly keep it a secret''>
'' In addition, most likely will never tell the public of the opportunity they had to beat the truth out of him''.

Therfore, the USA itself and every body in goverment that knew, will forever have to live with being a traiter and enemy to thier own kind. What comes first ,'people or laws'?

….The End

I wonder what law is made to protect the rights of the law ?

I wonder what law gave law more importance then the people ?

Now I see why this world is screwed up !
We have less then 300 people that control the fate of over 300million more people, and out that 300, we have one person to think and make some of the most crucial decisions for all of us.

Therefore, do I prey to God Ron Paul wins…, or do I prey to God Obama wins ,or do I pray to God the tea party wins.

Will you excuse me I got to




One man i know for sure in this scnario would think just how you would think,''go by the law and let them die''.

And then you have one man who would toture him.

Then you have one party that will cut disabilty checks and take medicare away and most likly will start a war with every country on the map.

It’s a ruff life for us civilians huh, lol…the natives…the pheasants, loll... I wonder what they call us behind closed doors when speaking upon themselves?
Any way,i understand your point perfectly,i really do,if thats the decision,then so be it.
edit on 13-10-2011 by LogiosHermes27 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-10-2011 by LogiosHermes27 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Actually, I wouldnt be "letting" anything happen at all. As torture was never on the table to begin with, there is no decision whether to use, or not to use it
Thus the onus is all on the cliched man chanting in arabic or whatever.

Oh, have I also mentioned torture is notoriously unreliable? Folks seem to be not addressing that point and assuming there is a 100% chance of successfully torturing out the CORRECT information


The ends cannot be used to justify the means. That kind of thinking allows any and all atrocities to be common place in the world. Its partially why the world is in such ethical shambles as it is now, if not a large part.

And how do you figure I would be dead? And if I was dead, why wouldnt I still have my principles? Are you coming from the materialist stand point on this?
edit on 10/13/2011 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)
edit on 10/13/2011 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a terrorist,whether a U.S. citizen or not, is not just your ordinary criminal, they are hell bent on killing people and making others live in fear.

therefore they should not be treated as a citizen, or a ordinary criminal, or a prisoner of war. if they resist during interrogation, by refusing to supply information that would stop the attack. then any and every means possible should be used, before sending them on their journey to what ever promised land they prefer.

not only that, as much pain as possible should be inflicted, and as much disrespect towards their cause so that they also suffer mental anguish as well. being that they are vermin that choose to kill indiscriminately, not only men and women, but also children. when you choose to kill in this fashion, you have given up your right to be considered a human, and there is no shame in disposing of them in any and all ways.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by CaticusMaximus
 




The ends cannot be used to justify the means.


So, saving 40m lives does not justify the torture you inflicted on one man?



That kind of thinking allows any and all atrocities to be common place in the world.


That is ridiculous. Idealism can do those things too. Think of Hitlers idealism.



Its partially why the world is in such ethical shambles as it is now.


The world is fine (if not way better off than in the past). At any rate, place the blame on an abstract concept is hardly fair. Not to mention idealism plays a huge role in how the world functions to begin with. So this point is moot.



Or are you coming from the materialist stand point on this?


I am coming from a "I want to save as many lives as possible even if i have to sacrifice my soul to Satan himself" stand point.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


post by hounddoghowlie>>>

a terrorist,whether a U.S. citizen or not, is not just your ordinary criminal, they are hell bent on killing people and making others live in fear.

therefore they should not be treated as a citizen, or a ordinary criminal, or a prisoner of war. if they resist during interrogation, by refusing to supply information that would stop the attack. then any and every means possible should be used, before sending them on their journey to what ever promised land they prefer.

not only that, as much pain as possible should be inflicted, and as much disrespect towards their cause so that they also suffer mental anguish as well. being that they are vermin that choose to kill indiscriminately, not only men and women, but also children. when you choose to kill in this fashion, you have given up your right to be considered a human, and there is no shame in disposing of them in any and all ways.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------

'After i finish crying', i will respond...That was so touching and thrilling at the same time. The USA loves you...and the 40 million people that you saved.




Text not only men and women, but also children. when you choose to kill in this fashion, you have given up your right to be considered a human, and there is no shame in disposing of them in any and all ways.

:u

'you have given up your right to be considered a human'




edit on 13-10-2011 by LogiosHermes27 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-10-2011 by LogiosHermes27 because: (no reason given)





new topics




 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join