But perhaps remains to be dealt with.
There was definitely reason to believe that he wasn’t “done with” so much as in exile. Sauron, throughout the Second Age, was marshalling his powers in order to return Morgoth to Arda. The temple he had built in Numenor was a temple to Morgoth and the sacrifices that were made there were dedicated to him.
The problem is that, although Morgoth is banished, his influence remains. Sauron is the most obvious example of his remaining influence, but really, it’s the more subtle influences that are more dangerous in the long run. All evil ultimately stems from Morgoth, but so thoroughly intertwined with the good in the world that it’s impossible to disentangle them, and so banishing Morgoth wasn’t enough.
I know better to quibble with Tolkien geeks, but my reply was to the guy speculating another “badass” was to pop up (and was brief, no implication intended Evil was done with, etc).
In the context of finalised published materials, Silmarillion, Return of the King, if we are in the scenario that the One Ring is destroyed after Sauron’s first defeat, we’re in the same scenario as at end of Return of the King. I daresay there was no hint of an immediate “badass” return.
So says JRRT at the end of Quenta Silmarillion. Dark fruit unto the latest days…
I’d expect that with the fading of the firstborn, it is the race of men which would be upholding the will of Morgoth in times to come. If the ring had been destroyed by Isildur, doubtless some chieftain from Rhun, or Umbar would eventually have risen on the backs of slave labor and misery to try to exert his will over others.
I think this captures my line of thinking. Each passing age is a lessening of power (a classical narrative), ergo the next as QtM writes will be men of evil. Not Morgoth as the “badass”
Assuming he made it as far as the Gladden Fields – I have this recurring mental image of Isildur and Elrond heading into Mount Doom, and only Elrond coming out, and saying: “Oops”. 
Would things have been better? Many lives would have been saved by that act, at least in the War of the Ring. Yet most of us, and I suspect Professor Tolkien, would consider it an inherently evil deed.
Frodo was 50 when he left the Shire for Rivendell.
But in the world of LotR, the powers that be can manipulate even bad acts to good ends (Frodo failing to destroy the ring + Gollum stealing it back = ring destroyed). Doesn’t make the evil acts less evil, though.
Wait a minute.
Now, I admit I don’t have the text in front of me, but as I recall, nobody understood the Ring’s power. One reason the Ring was so dangerous was that of all the wise, onyl gandalf and Saruman really understood that the Ring wasn’t just a potent magical tool, but part of Sauron’s very being. IIRC, Isildur might have been warned in vague terms that maybe the Ring wasn’t particuarly safe, but nobody really thought about it. Nobody knew how dangerous it was. In fact, it wasn’t until much later that they even knew Sauron survived his fall.
I think you might be conflating the movie and the book. I’ve done it myself a few times, even forgetting that in the books, Sauron was up and walking about (and probably had been for some time), and personally tortured Gollum.
In any case, I can’t find Tolkein’s letters, either, but I recall him saying that nobody on the earth could have willingly tossed the Ring away, not in the very heart of its power. Possibly this would not have been true right after Sauron’s defeat, but I wouldn’t wager it.
The elves knew. They knew when the One Ring was created that it controlled the other rings.
Sauron personally tortured Gollum? Where does it say that?
They knew one thing you coudl do with it. That’s a far cry from what they learned later.
“Yes, He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,’ said Gollum shuddering.”
He had seen Sauron personally and evidently faced Sauron’s personal attention. of course, the torment may not have been physical…
Oh, I’m certain the Professor would have considered it an evil act – it was really just an amusing notion & mental scene I could see playing out between Isildur and Elrond.
Well… take a look at FOTR “The Council of Elrond.” Both Elrond and Cirdan urged Isildur to destroy the Ring, but he wouldn’t. If you’re going to ignore two of the wisest Elves and insist on taking a weregild from the Dark Lord who was just wearing it, you get what’s comin’ to ya.
Do they actually explain anything? I recall them being rather vague and none too useful. Wasn’t their advice based on a vague foreboding?
Isildur gets it up to the Cracks of Doom, looks at the fire, looks at the Ring, starts to think, “Eh, such an innocent thing. So pretty, in the firelight. Such rare beauty, rare and precious…” Still, he has enough strength of will to… flick it halfheartedly in the general direction of the flames. It not being the Time for such events, he misses, but doesn’t notice it, his mind being clouded. With the Ring not really destroyed, major earthquakes and erruptions fail to happen, paradoxically indicating that the bauble was nothing much.
Isildur comes back and announces that he’s done the deed. No one thinks to wonder if that’s really so.
The Ring gets picked up by a rat who looses it to a bat who by further chance takes it out of Mordor.
From what I understand, though, there wasn’t much of this that was really chance. I think it might have all played out much the same anyhow.
You’re right; I had forgotten that line. That would certain imply that Gollum had seen Sauron, and had not found the experience pleasant.
I think the Elves were pretty much aware of what the Ring was. But it may be that they were reluctant to share their knowledge with Men.
Didn’t Gandalf torture Gollum too? Something about putting the fear of fire in him?