Last night I was watching ol Larry King and he had a plethera of guests on to talk about the Jill Carroll kidnapping by terrorist deal.
A lot of yada-yada bullshit went back and forth...Larry asked each of his 400 guests if "we" should negotiate with terrorists. Of course, everyone said no...The interesting part is when he came to an Al Jazzera reporter, an Iraqi...he said that you shouldn't negotiate, because it only propogates the violence. BUT he said that a huge mistake that is made is this: after the "crisis" is over, no one ever tries to resolve the issue that brought such a brash move in the first place. He said that when a group goes so far as to kidnap someone just so that their story gets attention, that there is something that needs to be worked on. They, the "terrorist", still have a problem or grievance that needs to be looked at. They don't just kidnap people for fun, it's for attention to their cause.
I found this amazing and fascinating. Why doesn't the government do that? Seriously, it's not like these kidnappers want a ransom, so they are not in it for the money, and it's my belief that most of them are not in it just to kill people for sport...so why isn't there more focus on trying to negotiate after the crisis is over? Wonder what would happen if people realized that there were people who did care about their plight? I don't buy the US line that "they" just want to ruin "our freedom", that's complete bullshit. A roadside bomb in Iraq is meant to get attention for something that's going on in Iraq. Wonder what needs to happen to stop it before it goes to the point of using bombs? Wonder why these people feel so hopeless that their only "option" is to use bombs? I don't really think that when the US thinks they've found a bomber, and they blow up like 14 houses filled with people to kill that ONE person they have done anything but frustrate the situation more.
I know that was sort of rambly...but I think there is something to this. It seems so simple.........