RootsBooster Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 The UK and USA have a policy of NOT negotiating with terrorists, but how concrete is this policy? Just humour me with this one: If a hostage was taken by a terrorist who's only ransom request was a cute puppy, would our government budge on their policy? Or SLIGHTLY more realistic: If a terrorist organisation took several hostages and their ransom request was for someone to build them a well providing drinkable water for their village, would the government budge on the policy? (assuming that there was no safe way to save the hostages, as is often the case) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Spyda Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 It's just words, it's not an actual policy. I'm sure the Government would take each case on an individual basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andikay Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 The UK and USA have a policy of NOT negotiating with terrorists, but how concrete is this policy? Just humour me with this one: If a hostage was taken by a terrorist who's only ransom request was a cute puppy, would our government budge on their policy? Or SLIGHTLY more realistic: If a terrorist organisation took several hostages and their ransom request was for someone to build them a well providing drinkable water for their village, would the government budge on the policy? (assuming that there was no safe way to save the hostages, as is often the case) If you gave them the puppy or dug the well there would be more hostages taken and more demands, if you give in to blackmail all you do is encourage more blackmail. There is nothing wrong with negotiating as long as you don’t give them what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Make sure the puppy has rabies and is hungry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 But didn't we negoiate with ira ? Didn't the Americans help broker it ? Are certain generals wanting us to negoiate with the taleban ? I think the puppy is safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristow Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 To all extents I would`ve thought. Weather it be a puppy or a fully fueled 747. The correct policy in my eyes too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 What if they eat the puppy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 But didn't we negoiate with ira ? Not until after they'd declared a permanent ceasefire. (Of course, such declarations can always be rescinded if the negotiations don't go the way that the former terrorist group wanted them to go.) This is by Rudyard Kipling: It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation To call upon a neighbour and to say: -- "We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight, Unless you pay us cash to go away." And that is called asking for Dane-geld, And the people who ask it explain That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld And then you'll get rid of the Dane! It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation, To puff and look important and to say: -- "Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you. We will therefore pay you cash to go away." And that is called paying the Dane-geld; But we've proved it again and again, That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld You never get rid of the Dane. It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation, For fear they should succumb and go astray; So when you are requested to pay up or be molested, You will find it better policy to say: -- "We never pay any-one Dane-geld, No matter how trifling the cost; For the end of that game is oppression and shame, And the nation that pays it is lost!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 The UK and USA have a policy of NOT negotiating with terrorists, but how concrete is this policy? Just humour me with this one: If a hostage was taken by a terrorist who's only ransom request was a cute puppy, would our government budge on their policy? Or SLIGHTLY more realistic: If a terrorist organisation took several hostages and their ransom request was for someone to build them a well providing drinkable water for their village, would the government budge on the policy? (assuming that there was no safe way to save the hostages, as is often the case) Back Channels are always open (a la Northern Ireland in the 70's and thereafter) The no negotiation policy is for the consumption of the masses only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 No negotiation whatsoever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.