"Strategic Secret Service" is an American film released in 2009. The plot, setting and characters are extremely simple, but it poses a difficult question for Americans in the post-9/11 era: the value of morality. Since the founding of the United States, except for the Pearl Harbor incident during World War II, there have been basically no war attacks in the United States. The United States is prosperous and healthy, and the United States has a vast land, which enables Americans to breed high standards of morality and polish diamond-like values. However, when the 9/11 incident destroyed the twin towers, which symbolized happiness and power, Americans realized that the morality they cherished, this beautiful diamond, was just a false glass. Under the blow of anger and fear, Easily shattered and disintegrated.
The story of "Strategic Special Service Team" is very simple, similar to the American TV series "24 Hours of Counter-Terrorism". An angry Islamic believer planted three nuclear bombs in the United States, each of which could kill nearly 10 million innocent people. Unlike "24 Hours of Terrorism", there is no brave Jack Bauer looking for bad guys in the streets. The bad guy went to the strategic special team himself because he believed that what he did represented justice, that enduring abuse and paying his life was the price that should be paid for pursuing justice. He would not hypocritically shout justice while hiding himself in safety . Under the pressure of time, there is only one thing the strategic special team can do: ask the bad guys where the bombs are placed. It was never easy, because they were dealing with a man who was prepared intellectually, mentally, and physically.
There are several steps in front of the strategic special team. The first is to follow the prisoner of war convention for torture, the second is to trample the human rights of prisoners of war and abuse them. Men's children come as threats. There is no difficulty in climbing the first ladder, but it is by no means fruitful. So he had to step up the second ladder, and at this time, the voice of opposition began to hit. But when a warning bomb exploded and 53 civilians were killed, the opponents stopped opposing and all ran up the second ladder. It's a pity that the villain still refuses to bow his head. The third ladder is very high, and no one can climb it. After all, the bad guy's wife is innocent, and it is absolutely immoral to take her life as the price. On the spot, only the person in charge of the torture did not hesitate. Amid everyone's obstruction, the torturer slashed the throat of the villain's wife, allowing the villain to witness the strategic task force's choice between victory and morality.
After all, the torturer had a struggle in his heart. After killing the bad guy's wife, he hid in the bathroom and wept, and he no longer wanted to continue. The rest of the Secret Service team strongly disagreed with the torturer's behavior, but ironically, while blaming the torturer, they asked him to go back and torture the bad guys. It's really sad. In the choice between victory and morality, the secret service team chose victory, but they thought that as long as they didn't open their mouths to support the torturers, as long as they didn't speak out about their choice, they would be able to prove that they were still standing above morality. What's even more tragic is that these people were foolish enough not to understand in advance what it meant to ask the torturer to continue. That's for him to step up the fourth ladder. So the torturer goes back to the bad guy again and asks the others to bring the bad guy's child in. At this point, the scene finally exploded, everyone jumped up, and even the torturer's assistant was furious. As a result, the torturer locked himself and the bad guy's child in the torture chamber, and let the others roar outside. The bad guy finally broke down, he knew that this torturer would really hurt his children, and he knew that this torturer had no moral bottom line. The villain revealed where the three bombs were placed.
When everyone thought that the matter was finally over, the torturer still refused to give up, because the torturer believed that with the wisdom and determination of this bad guy, he dared to go to the special team by himself, and he must have done a good job and failed to survive the torture in the end. preparation. Therefore, in addition to the three bombs that were lit up on the table, the bad guys must have hidden another one, and judging from the amount of uranium stolen, the idea of a fourth bomb is also supported. After listening to the reasoning of the torturers, the group was forced to decide whether to take the fourth step. Leaders from the top say that if the children of the bad guys are not sacrificed, all of our children will be sacrificed. And the female member Helen, who represents integrity, shouted excitedly, let the damn bomb explode. From the very beginning, the torturer knew that he had no moral bottom line, so he always insisted that Helen must participate in the whole process, because he knew that Helen was an upright person, and he believed that Helen’s bottom line could keep him from crossing the threshold of humanity. So he stopped, untied the bad guy's body, and watched the bad guy take the pistol and commit suicide. And the last words of the bad guy turned out to be asking them to take good care of his children!
"Game Bible" says: "The forbearance made after the prediction of the tragedy is moral, and the competition made before the victory is the game". This is a plausible statement, but also an empty statement. When we anticipate tragedy and understand that only competition, not forbearance, can avoid tragedy, should we choose morality or game? In the pre-9/11 America, they believed that only bad people would harm innocent people in order to achieve their goals. They believed that no matter what the purpose was, as long as innocent people were harmed, they were tantamount to bad people. But after 9/11, their ideas collapsed, when great harm befalls them, when fear and death hang over them, they finally understand that their morality is a utopia, a castle in the air, a reality that cannot stand the test soap bubbles.
There is nothing wrong with American morals, whether before or after 9/11. What is wrong is the foundation upon which morality itself is formed, and what is wrong is the way in which morality is shouted. The establishment of morality is accompanied by the changes of social culture. Morality is always changing. There is no right morality, nor wrong morality, only the morality that is suitable for the current environment. In fact, morality is like a thousand layers of pie, which will shatter layer by layer with external pressure, just like the plot in "Strategic Special Task Force", when everyone steps up the first ladder, does it mean the collapse of morality? , no longer exists? Of course not, when they stand on the second ladder, they can see that the first ladder is actually quite moral. And while standing on the third step, the second step appears to be moral. In the end, morality is only the product of environmental change, the result of a compromise with reality. Before 9/11, American morality was formed in comfort and happiness. After 9/11, American morality was formed in death and fear. Whether it is the former or the latter, they are all fragile and neither are they free. It is true everywhere, it is not the morality that is true throughout the ages. However, Americans often forget this, so they sacrifice their own moral standards to everyone, ignoring the differences in the reality of other countries, and this ultimately hits Americans reflexively and shatters their own morality.
The most interesting part of "Strategic Secret Service" is the moral tug of war between Henry the torturer and Helen, the FBI counterterrorism agent. Henry stood at the bottom of morality from the beginning, while Helen was at the top of morality. Henry clearly saw the essence of morality from the very beginning, but Helen never understood the result of the game of morality. When standing between thousands of lives and individual lives, how to choose? When standing between a huge tragedy and personal moral collapse, how to choose? When the path of morality points to the formation of tragedy, and the path of games points to moral decline, how should we choose? In fact, no matter what choice you make, there is no right or wrong, but the difference lies in the courage to choose. Helen did not want to see a great tragedy happen, but she was unwilling to give up her moral philosophy; Henry did not want to see a great tragedy happen, but she had the courage to go to hell on behalf of everyone. The difference between Helen and Henry is not morality, but courage. Henry has the determination to give up morality, but Helen does not have the courage to insist on morality. So Helen retreated morally again and again until the last line of defense was challenged. Even so, Henry regarded Helen as his ultimate support and the ultimate guardian of humanity. Because Henry knew that when people had to surrender in the face of reality, when people repeatedly retreated the moral defense line, the courage at the beginning would eventually blind people and lead people to a situation where they lost their humanity. And this is the dilemma that Americans are facing now. They are constantly compromising and retreating morally to avoid the continuous occurrence of huge tragedies. They need a human guard to put the brakes on them and let their moral values lose their bottom line. Find a balance. However, despite this, they are still far from our moral bottom line.
View more about Unthinkable reviews
