"THE SUSPECT IS BEING TORTURED! THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!"

*Helen Brodey (Unthinkable).

Without giving too much away (spolier alert, just to be safe) Unthinkable is a film that asks the question "how far is too far when it comes to the defence of your country?".

Yep, it's the old 'torture question'.

The reason I bring it up here is because this caused something of a rift in my household between me and my lady friend. I shall explain why...

The terrorist, who early in the film has surrendered himself to the authorities, has planted a number of bombs across America. They will detonate at a given time, causing thousands, perhaps even millions, of deaths. At first interrogation yields no results, and it's at this point the govenment unofficially enlist the skills of a professional torturer- a man who seemingly knows no boundaries in his work.

Through the film various characters come into conflict regarding the 'right' way to proceed.

Here we come to the crux. During the climax of the film, after the terrorist has supplied the government with directions leading to the safe diffusional of the bombs, information comes to light that there is in fact one last bomb hidden in a major city. Time is almost out.

The terrorist will no yield further information, no matter what deal or harm befalls him. Many people, including women and children innocent of any wrong doing to this man, will die as a certainty.

Is it right to torture the terrorist's own wife and children?

Doing so could save thousands, so do the needs of the many outweigh the human rights of the few? Or by doing so do we become as vile, or worse, than the enemy we mean to eradicate? Victory at what price?

So allow me to put the cat amongst the pigeons. I said "torture the terrorist's family." For my money, it was a simple choice. If I had a wife and child in danger of being killed in an explosion, I would rather harm befall the family of the man responsible than my own loved ones. Selfish? Yes. Barbaric? Yes, but wouldn't you also prefer that to the alternative? Hell, you'd rather wish that fate on anybody except your own family, am I right? My thoughts are "the terrorist made his family a part of this when he decided to take the lives of innocent people. If harming them is the only way to save others, then that's an unfortunate trade".

My lady friend disagreed with me. She said it can never be the right thing to torture children, whatever the situation. By her thinking, these children, whoever their father is, are innocent. And she's absolutely right, which is what makes this a difficult subject.

I won't spoil the ending of the film, but it's well worth a watch, so long as you have a strong stomach and you can accept the subject matter.



So, over to you. What do you guys think?

Torture the terrorist's family for information or allow the bomb to detonate?