Agreed, Harry. In kidnapping situations, ‘no negotiations’ probably means that future kidnappings will be fewer.

 

But the Bush administration and the Israelis use the phrase not to refer to kidnappings in particular, but the matters of negotiating peace with militant groups.  I wish both those governments knew enough to make the distinction that you, correctly IMO, make.

 

Cheers,

Lawry

 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harry Pollard
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 3:35 PM
To: 'Christoph Reuss'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re: "you can't negotiate with terrorists"

 

Chris and Lawry,

 

We are mixing apples and Oranges.

 

The “no negotiation” applies to specific instances - such as kidnapping. The argument - surely a good one - is that negotiating the release of a victim merely encourages more kidnapping.

 

No negotiation might mean fewer kidnaps.

 

This is very different from (say) negotiating a peace.

 

Harry

 

*******************************

Henry George School of Social Science

of Los Angeles

Box 655  Tujunga  CA 91042

818 352-4141

*******************************

 

 

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From:        [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:futurework-

> [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Christoph Reuss

> Sent:          Saturday, July 09, 2005 4:32 PM

> To: [email protected]

> Subject:     [Futurework] Re: “you can’t negotiate with terrorists”

>

> Lawrence deBivort wrote:

> > The US and Israeli view that ‘you can’t negotiate with terrorists’

> is

> > fundamentally wrong, as the long history of such successful

> > negotiations shows.

>

> This assumes that successful negotiations are the goal.  Wrong

> assumption.

>

> Who wants successful negotiations—i.e. a peaceful solution—when

> the

> bogeymen of terrorism are _needed_ (not only “wanted” ;-} ) to

> “justify”

> domestic Orwellian measures, booming armaments & “security”

> industry

> sales (Israel’s only growth sectors), and globalized hegemony (you

> are

> either with us or with the bogeymen, forget neutrality) ?

>

> Plus, the bogeymen help to deflect global attention from the

> environment,

> sweatshops, social decay, Codex Alimentarius etc. etc.—it all

> becomes

> unimportant if you have to think of your bare survival in the bus.

>

> So perhaps the question is:  Can you, as a voter, negotiate with state

> terrorists ?

>

> Chris

>

>

>

>

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the

> keyword

> “igve”.

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Futurework mailing list

> [email protected]

> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to