explicit torture in 1080p.

btw. who would have tortured the kids to save 20 million other kids and their families?
I think I might have to as much as I'd hate to..
Also, torturing one person to save tens of millions is not 'dropping to their level', if anything that we even question whether we should makes us enlightened even if we do end of having to go dark ages on one person.

I wouldn't have tortured the kids. It was not the kids fault. And it's not the kids fault that they are the children of the terrorist. And they could have easily talked to the president but they chose not to. The fat bastards in suits are the ones to blame (and the terrorist ofc) and not the kids.

I blame his wife for not giving him a good BJ ... A good BJ once and a while can make the difference

yes it is dropping to their level. We as americans are suppose to be above that shit, clearly our government isnt as they are willing to torture and order assassination against our own citizens(in real life).

Pumpy, it's not about the kids it's about putting pressure on daddy nuclear terrorist, remember that amongst those tens of millions are many Muslim children.
It is a hard choice but the whole 'becoming the enemy' is utter bullshit, the Anglosphere can stand by its historical record of doing far more good than harm, what's amazing about the film is that finally it puts the liberal agenda under the spotlight when we have to make hard choices (reflected very well by Carrie Anne Moss) and the heartache that follows choice.

I couldn't care less if there are millions of muslim, jew, atheist or christian children, elderly, women, men, chinese, blacks, turks, arabs, dogs, mice, cats or whatever. Nobody would even think about doing something bad to the USA if they weren't fucking around with EVERYBODY AND the goddamn planet itself. The USA administration is the cancer of this planet.

That doesn't mean that I would want innocent people to die. But if you torture innocent people to apply pressure on the terrorist, than you are not a single bit better than the terrorist himself. The life of 10 million is not more worth than the life of two innocent children. You can decide for yourself to make a sacrifice to save other people. But you can't take someone else's life to save em.

The government could have saved the 10 million people by simply accepting that they will leave the muslim countries and stop killing them.

But it says a lot about what you think about me with you saying to me that there would be a lot of muslim children too when the bombs explode...

In fact it's the conservative/egoistic agenda that kills the 10 million people, as they were not ready to retreat from the countries they shouldn't have been in the first place.

I couldn't torture the kids. I would however have used any type of threats that I would torture or kill the kids to get information though

OK, there are several issues that seem to be ignored. First of all, it's not 2 lives vs 2 million.
What if there was no fourth bomb?
What if you killed those two children but haven't managed to stop the bombs?
In that case you would be adding those 2 children on top of 2 million.

Also, some of you are saying it is morally justified to kill children in order to "save lives". But that is exactly what that "terrorists" intention is - he takes away some American lives in order to stop America from killing millions of people by various means - from military use to sanctions (one million children died in Iraq as direct result of sanctions).So it is the terrorist who has the moral justification to set of those bombs.