Would you negotiate?

[Mike - Indi Rev]

Relating to this news article:

If you were in Tony Blair's position here what you would you do? And what do you think would be the 'right' thing to do (if this differs from your first answer)?

On one hand, if you give in to their demands to negotiate the hostage's release, you'll have saved a life. But then if you follow this course of action then surely you're just inviting more people to try the same thing, knowing that they'll be able to get whatever they want.

Discuss

[All_in_black]

I'd pay money man!!! Money is not as important as a human life. That, by the way, was the smartest thing Berlusconi has ever done.

[Rebelius]

I wouldn't negotiate because it puts more people in danger of being kidnapped.

[kj]

i wouldnt negotiate. It wouldnt make sense to negotiate. And to give them money is ludicrous. What do you think they are going to spend the money on? eh eh?

[All_in_black]

Well it worked for the Italians. Would you prefer that those two young women were still in captivity?

[kj]

of course not. Not now, why would i want to hand them back? However i wouldnt have paid them cash for their release. The problem is you'll get more people being kidnapped because non terrorist groups are going to see this as a quick way to get cash. Its increased the danger to foreign civilian workers, not increased their safety.

You think these terrorists are the Italians friends now? You think that if the British negotiate for Bigleys release that the British and the terrorists are gonna be cool? They'll still keep taking hostages, killing them and holding others for ransom.

[All_in_black]

I know, but in each individual hostage case, the government in question will be under great pressure from the media and public to pay up. You see?

I agree, it's a difficult decision, and maybe Italy did the wrong thing, but when the whole country wants you to get them out (as anybody would) then you have little option but to negotiate their terms or some fee.

Of course the UK has always had the policy that they will not negotiate with terrorists, and so I think it's unlikely that they will.

It's just so difficult not to let your feelings of complete pity for Bigley and his family to get in the way of your judgement.

[kj]

this is why in situations like this the media plays such a negative role. This is exactly what the terrorists want, to humiliate countries into doing what they want. Italy and the Phillipines did that. The media plays into their hands. There have been so many hostage situations similar to Bigley's situation that havent achieved such an interest in the public eye. The terrorists want that to happen so that public sympathy gets to such a level where it begins to put doubt into the governments mind.

meh. it is indeed a horrid situation though and i'm glad its not me in the middle of it.

[Mike - Indi Rev]

Originally Posted by All_in_black

but when the whole country wants you to get them out (as anybody would) then you have little option but to negotiate their terms or some fee.

See thats one thing I don't like. When you say the 'whole country' I assume you mean the majority of the country. And in cases like this I dont think that the majority of the country want Tony Blair to give in here. I'd agree that everyone would like the guy to be freed but most people I feel would agree that giving in here would be freeing him at too great a cost - the cost being the many lives that are potentially being put in danger by stating "take our citizens hostage, we'll pay you for it"

I really think in this case most people have the sense to see that taking the hardline stance like Blair is doing is for the greater good. It just so happens that the people who get up-in-arms about these kinds of issues are also the people who shout the loudest and who the media want to give attention to.

I think Blair is doing the right thing here. Even if he is going up against 'public opinion'.

[Jeebus]

I don't think the "whole country" wants Tony Blair to negoiate. Most people I've spoken to don't want any negotiations.

[Mike - Indi Rev]

Yeah that's what I was meaning.

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by All_in_black

Of course the UK has always had the policy that they will not negotiate with terrorists, and so I think it's unlikely that they will.

Just quoting cos its one of the points I was going to make. Northern Ireland: The good Friday Agreement and ceasefires only came about after negotiations with terrorists/freedom fighters/state (dont want to start random NI politics tangent: whichever term you are happy with).

In any other situation where hostages are taken the police negotiate with the hostage takers in order to secure the release of the hostages ALIVE.

and also Iran when the embassy was seized. We have always negotiated with those who have taken hostages in order to secure their release ALIVE.

[kj]

Originally Posted by Alan G

Just quoting cos its one of the points I was going to make. Northern Ireland: The good Friday Agreement and ceasefires only came about after negotiations with terrorists/freedom fighters/state (dont want to start random NI politics tangent: whichever term you are happy with).

In any other situation where hostages are taken the police negotiate with the hostage takers in order to secure the release of the hostages ALIVE.

and also Iran when the embassy was seized. We have always negotiated with those who have taken hostages in order to secure their release ALIVE.

But werent negotiations carried out with Sinn Fein who are a political party in that province? Also, with the Iranian embassy, wasnt that stormed by SAS soldiers?

[AlanG]

yes, but everyone sat round a big table speaking to each other like adults and its led on a pass to a semi-peaceful settlement (not going on wild tangent about NI politics)

As for Iran, they had been negotiating with them for ages then made an attempt to rescue the hostages.

Here theyre saying "llalalala not listening to you we dont negotiate lalalal"