No. Torture has never been a reliable means of extracting information, and to ever consider torturing a child is unthinkable. As has already been pointed out, there is no possible scenario under which doing so would guarantee saving millions of lives.
Priceguy, JFTR, there is no such thing as a “button” which would detonate a nuclear bomb. It doesn’t work that way.
DoC, well technically, you could make one that would work that way. If you were into setting nuclear baby traps, that is…
Certainly not.
And the nuclear baby trap is a ridiculous setup, as has already been pointed out. (You’re telling me you’d let a baby get anywhere near a big red button that just happens to be on the floor?) It’s so completely unrealistic, for so many reasons, that it’s not worth thinking about.
You can’t save the world from terrorism by becoming a terrorist.
Israel is trying real hard.
Oh wait… youre right. Israel isnt saving the world. Israel is only trying to save Israel. Theyve done pretty good so far. I really dont mind terrorists so long as they blow themselves up in their own area. I would just keep away from them.
Please stick to the topic. There are plenty of bigoted racists threads here to vent at the US.
Anyway, I see where the OP is going with this, but it is kind of flawed in that it restricted the innocent family member by age. Not sure what is up with that, but it would be morally repugnant to me to kill an innocent loved one to garner a confession.
Now, threatening to do so is another thing entirely.
On what scale are they doing “pretty good”? I keep seeing stories about suicide bombers and dead children. If “pretty good” means “still militarily and economically strong” then I guess you’re right. If it’s supposed to mean “effectively containing terroristic actions against them” I would disagree.
And how do you make that threat credible without having become known as a country/regime/hellish mob which tortures children?
No no no no no!!!
Absolutely not! That would merely turn us into terrorists. My GOD, hell no!!!
:mad:
This is precisely the mentality spawned by such fundamentalist lunacy that inspires your question.
It is nothing more than; 'Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the heads of their children.
It is wrong, it is a root of more evil than living men can name and it is everything that is perverted about fundamentalism.
An emphatic, NO!
Incidentally, the hypothetical situation of a “baby crawling towards the massive nuclear launch button” is just so much horse hockey as well. There is no way that such technology will ever be unaccompanied by any safeguards. Such power will always be bounded by interlocks preventing such a nonsensical scenario.
I would consider torturing a child an act of purest evil regardless of the situation. There is no justification for such a heinous act.
Anyone performing such an act would be deserving of the same torture ten times over.
No, of course not. However, it would be ethical to threaten, and actually carry out something like: “We have your children. You know what we’re going to do? Send them to America, to be raised by American foster parents. They’ll be raised to believe in democracy, that muslims and christians should live in peace, they’ll learn english and watch MTV and R rated movies, they’ll go to US government schools which will teach them the glorious accomplishments of America, and go to whatever church, mosque, synagogue or coven their foster parents pick out. However…if you tell us what we want to know, we’ll keep them in Pakistan, at one of the madrassas…”
In a pragmatic world, the ends are justification of the means.
I always give the same answer to these hypotheticals. If you’re facing such a situation, it’s your call. Do whatever you think is justified, but knowing that anyway, you commited a crime and you’ll be sent to a court and prosecuted for the crime (torture, in this case) you commited.
If you’re really sure that millions of life are threatened, really sure that torture is the only way to avoid to save these millions of people, and that torture will actually work, then go for it. The stakes are so high that most probably you won’t mind being send to prison for, say, a dozen of years to save all those life (beside, the jury and the judge might be very lenient…providing that you manage to convince them that the threat was real, and the torture necessary and useful…which shouldn’t be a problem if you’re really really sure of your judgment).
Of course, if the issue doesn’t appear important enough to you to take some personnal risks (like being sentenced for torture/murder) or if you’re not very sure that torture is necessary in the situation you’re facing…then maybe you should abstain…
To quote Harvey Keitel “If you beat a guy long enough, he’ll tell you if he wears ladies underwear” I am loathe to quote movies, but this is as true a statement as was ever uttered in any given motion picture.
Do I agree with torturing terrorists? Sure, why not. I 'm not altogether against street cops tuning up some wise assed mutt on the street to catch another bad guy…I’ll catch hell for that, I know, but unless you’re dealing with those people who consider themselves above the law, your comments won’t carry much weight. And JFTR, by ‘tuning up’ I don’t mean sliding a floor lamp up some guys ass, I just mean doing exactly whats necessary, nothing more.
Do I agree with torturing their children? Definately not, although I like a good mind fu*k just as much as the next guy. Let 'em think their family is about to be tortured, or is being tortured, there’s an ocean of difference between torture and psych ops.
In this case, “the ends” include a world where torture of the innocent is acceptable. I think that such a world would be pretty horrible place to live.
So in a way you’re entirely correct.
Lemur866 says:
My suggestion parallels yours. In fact, why not take pictures of the children wearing crosses, wearing yarmulkes, posing in churches and synagogues? How about threatening to change their names and put them up for adoption in Middle America?
Works for me.
No.
Peace,
mangeorge
No.
But convincing the terrorist father that it would happen or is happening through special effects, actors … would be a valid action. If the terrorist really thinks he has been caught bythe devils from America you are justified to play on his fears of what a devil might do.