- Joined
- Jun 25, 2008
- Messages
- 8,080
- Reaction score
- 3,918
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
WARNING: This thread will contain spoilers about this movie. If you don't want it ruined, don't read ahead!
.
.
.
.
.
.
The scenario:
The basic premise of this film is that an American-born man with highly specialized U.S. military training and a connection to Russia acquires nuclear material and sets up three nuclear bombs in three hidden locations across the U.S. He says they are in highly populated urban areas and once they detonate they will kill tens of millions of people. They will detonate in less than one week.
His demands are that the U.S. stop funding foreign radical dictators, and to withdraw from all nations involved in the war on terror.
The U.S. CIA sets up an interrogation facility once they catch him and begin using legal interrogation techniques, though the man is highly resistant. After much deliberation, the military, under orders from the White House, brings in a torture specialist. The whole incident is considered off the record.
The specialist then begins to torture the man outside of the legal grounds of the Geneva Convention and U.S. Constitution. (Keep in mind that the man is a U.S. citizen.) Halfway through the movie it is declared that the man's citizenship was revoked and that he is now non-status, making the proceedings more murky.
They cut off his fingers, electrocute him, bring in his wife and threaten to torture her (she ends up getting her throat slit by the interrogator). The movie climaxes when the man's two children are brought in and their torture is guaranteed if the man does not cooperate, but at the last minute he does.
My question is, given the scenario of nuclear fallout, would the U.S. be justified in abandoning all of its principles in order to find the location of the bombs, even if the bombs could potentially be a hoax? Should no method be spared to assure the security of the nation?
.
.
.
.
.
.
The scenario:
The basic premise of this film is that an American-born man with highly specialized U.S. military training and a connection to Russia acquires nuclear material and sets up three nuclear bombs in three hidden locations across the U.S. He says they are in highly populated urban areas and once they detonate they will kill tens of millions of people. They will detonate in less than one week.
His demands are that the U.S. stop funding foreign radical dictators, and to withdraw from all nations involved in the war on terror.
The U.S. CIA sets up an interrogation facility once they catch him and begin using legal interrogation techniques, though the man is highly resistant. After much deliberation, the military, under orders from the White House, brings in a torture specialist. The whole incident is considered off the record.
The specialist then begins to torture the man outside of the legal grounds of the Geneva Convention and U.S. Constitution. (Keep in mind that the man is a U.S. citizen.) Halfway through the movie it is declared that the man's citizenship was revoked and that he is now non-status, making the proceedings more murky.
They cut off his fingers, electrocute him, bring in his wife and threaten to torture her (she ends up getting her throat slit by the interrogator). The movie climaxes when the man's two children are brought in and their torture is guaranteed if the man does not cooperate, but at the last minute he does.
My question is, given the scenario of nuclear fallout, would the U.S. be justified in abandoning all of its principles in order to find the location of the bombs, even if the bombs could potentially be a hoax? Should no method be spared to assure the security of the nation?
Last edited: