"Strict No".. to kidnappers
Can you give a single historical example of any conflict that was resolved with no negotiation whatsoever.Even WW2 ended by two groups of men sitting in a room and signing a piece of paper...."don't drop any more nukes on us please!"
In this environment, I think the only thing that could really discourage hostage taking & hostage execution would be some kind of special forces raid that resulted in the internet publication of videos showing the beheading of the hostage takers. Sending the very specific message of "try this any more and you'll be the ones being decapitated with a blunt breadknife".I think it would have to be thatspecific,
"we will not negotiate with kidnappers" line is half policy to prove that President B or whomever is tough on crime. As above, if it were Bush's daughters, he'd negotiate. If it was nuclear holocaust being threatened, he'd better negotiate.
I agree that notoriously giving in to the demands of kidnappers sets one up to have kidnappings in the future .If a particular group of people feel that it is profitable to kidnap americans for e.g., and they think that's morally ok, they are going to do it.
I can't say that I would approve of one approach over the other. I believe that the best approach is just to be objective about the risks.I would like to take the path that saves the most lives. So each individual case requires distinction.
comment:
p_commentcount