Reply
Wed 23 Jun, 2004 12:52 pm
If Donald Rumsfeld was going to be beheaded, would the government negotiate with terrorists?
He already is lacking one.
I'm gonna go with the thread title here.
If Rumsfeld were to be beheaded....would anyone care?
You don't think the rules would be different for rich, powerful people ?
I don't care whom it is. IMO, you DON'T negotiate with terrorists. Not being privy to the inner circles of government, I don't have the vaguest idea of what would be decided, although I could speculate!
cavfancier wrote:I'm gonna go with the thread title here.
If Rumsfeld were to be beheaded....would anyone care?
Is this happening in the woods?
On principle, I think to do what terrorists want in the face of terrorists acts or threats of terrorist acts is only to convince terrorists that their methods work. And I think when every civilized nation finally unerstands the truth of that and advises terrorists that not only will they not be given what they want but they will have no place with running water and electricity in which to hide, they just might decide to do things differently.
Phoenix32890 wrote:I don't care whom it is. IMO, you DON'T negotiate with terrorists. Not being privy to the inner circles of government, I don't have the vaguest idea of what would be decided, although I could speculate!
the US has usually negotiated with terrorists (sometimes successfully) and has a (CIA) trained specialist team ready to do so when called upon. Although this is not "public policy" to do so.
McGentrix wrote:cavfancier wrote:I'm gonna go with the thread title here.
If Rumsfeld were to be beheaded....would anyone care?
Is this happening in the woods?
It could be the woods, we are talking hypothetical situations here.
And we always make a problem out of it
I'm struggling with that one Rick. Did the USSR constitute a terrorist state? Atrocities were committed against its own citizens, yes, but is that the same thing as terrorists who commit or threaten unconscionable acts against innocents in order to change the behavior of others?
How about secretly trading arms for the release of Rumsfeld but being smart enough not to get caught.
OK I realize the link was a bit unclear. Arjan Erkel was abducted by Chechen terrorists (others prefer freedomfighters by the way); the Dutch government eventually paid one million euro's to free him. Now, the MSF don't want to pay their share of the one million euro's. According to the Dutch government they promised to do that.
McGentrix wrote:dyslexia wrote:Phoenix32890 wrote:I don't care whom it is. IMO, you DON'T negotiate with terrorists. Not being privy to the inner circles of government, I don't have the vaguest idea of what would be decided, although I could speculate!
the US has usually negotiated with terrorists (sometimes successfully) and has a (CIA) trained specialist team ready to do so when called upon. Although this is not "public policy" to do so.
Like when?
well, I suppose the most notable would be the Iran/Contra affair where the US (under Reagan) negotiated with the Iran terrorists. But I am sure you were aware of that.
Negotiating with the Iran terrorists was nothing.
We practically sponsored the Contra death squads. If they weren't terrorists I don't know who is.
But then in the words of the Gipper,
"One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist."
And don't forget this....
If that ain't our little Saddam.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace