Oh, for fuck’s sake. Mr Dibble is just refusing to play your stupid game of “let’s pretend that the world will explode if you don’t rape a baby to death. So much for your no torture stance! Hah!”
Are you man enough to rape a baby to death to stop the terrorist from exploding the planet? How many innocent babies would you rape to death to save the planet? One? Twenty? A million? Remember, you have to actually have an orgasm just as the baby dies, or it doesn’t count. Now who’s the tough guy who makes the tough decisions?
I mean, if you’d rape one baby to death to save the planet, but won’t rape a million babies to death, aren’t you a big fat hypocrite? The terrorist has the babies lined up and he’s waiting for you to rape them to death, or he blows up the planet. But he’s patient, a million babies can’t be raped to death in day, he’s reasonable.
Remember, you’re absolutely certain he’s got the bomb, and you know for a fact the world will klablooey if you don’t rape those babies. I know you were hoping for a more heroic torture scenario, where you get to torture a really bad guy for a really good cause. But no, in this case you’ve got to torture a million innocent babies to death, and have a orgasm every time you kill one, or good bye planet Earth. What are you, chicken? Not man enough to save the Earth, because of your puny hu-mon moral standards that don’t matter a hill of beans in the larger sense?
Your hypothetical is stupid. You won’t torture unless you’re absolutely sure the torture victim is a bad guy who deserves it. You won’t torture unless you’re absolutely sure it will work. You won’t torture unless it involves saving millions of people. You won’t torture unless there’s no other option. You’re a fucking hero. Except in real life, torture doesn’t work that way. In real life all the above are impossible to know.
So when people declare that they won’t torture even to save the planet, they’re just pissing on the stupid hypothetical. When people say they won’t throw one fat guy in front of the runaway train to save 5 skinny people, what they’re saying is that they reject the hypothetical. I reject the idea that there’s this terrorist who’s going to blow up the world in an hour, but if you torture him he gives up the information right away and you save the world. In real life most people will eventually crack. But after only one hour of torture? And when he knows that all he as to endure is one hour of discomfort and his troubles are over?
See, what makes people break under torture is the realization that the torture will continue forever, until the victim performs the action the torturer wants. Sign the confession. Give the combination to the safe. Tell us the location of the safe house. But your terrorist is such a pussy that, after all his work building a world-exploding planet-buster, he’s going to cave in just a few minutes. If he’s such a fucking pussy, maybe you could just try talking to him first.
In real life that’s how cops and interrogators get information from people. They talk with them. Turns out people will spill their guts just because they want to explain themselves to someone who appears to want to understand why. And so the best interrogators aren’t inhuman sadists, they are caring empathetic people who can at least fake sympathy, even for horrible people who’ve committed horrible acts.
So back to the baby raping. How many babies are you willing to rape to death to save the planet? How many dead babies does it take before the planet isn’t worth saving?