Absolutely not. Once you start paying ransom payments, you will see an increase in the number of abductions. Anybody who exposes them selves in this dangerous part of the World should know the odds and the dangers before traveling there. It would help to arm your self with a Glock 9mm handgun.
Again, as is so common on this site, those that vote on with liberal outlook on issues cannot/will not comment and support their stance (Bea M. is the lone exception).
If everyone that voted in these polls wrote a short (1minute) comment on why they were pro/con, THIS poll alone would've taken 832 minutes to read.
Now, if you subtract all the pro votes, yeah, you'd cut it down to just a little over an hour - the problem is, you'd have to at least BEGIN to read each comment, to know which way they were leaning. Wayyy-y-y too much time to spend on reading comments. (And, that doesn't even take into account people that commented, yet didn't vote).
I figure it's so much easier to read the poll, vote, then look at how many idiots didn't agree with my POV - THAT'S a JOKE, everybody. Save your thumbs for wind direction!
I have just one comment on this..... First, I voted NO as in hell no. Second, when I was growing up I remember frequent airline hijackings for ransom here in the US by both domestic and international thugs. They mostly stopped except for 9/11 (which was a very different hijacking which didnt involve ransom) do you know why? Well because we and most western nations stopped negotiating and stopped paying ransoms.
It does work but that doesn't console the hostages families or friends when things end badly. Most that are in danger of kidnapping and being held hostage, choose to be where they are and what they are doing. I dare say they would even agree with our policies on ransoms as well. That's just my opinion...
To pay ransoms and negotiate is to enable those terrorists to do it again and even builds up their psyche to think that they can get away with this. Again this is a generalization and very basic opinion. This topic is one of those that doesn't easily fit into back and white definitons.
Absolutely not. Once you
Absolutely not. Once you start paying ransom payments, you will see an increase in the number of abductions. Anybody who exposes them selves in this dangerous part of the World should know the odds and the dangers before traveling there. It would help to arm your self with a Glock 9mm handgun.
Not only that, but if you pay
Not only that, but if you pay them, you fund their operation. Meaning you are funding more death.
Lose 1 to save Thousands
Again, as is so common on
Again, as is so common on this site, those that vote on with liberal outlook on issues cannot/will not comment and support their stance (Bea M. is the lone exception).
Bob, what is the liberal
Bob, what is the liberal outlook on this issue?
Careful what you wish for,
Careful what you wish for, Bob.
If everyone that voted in these polls wrote a short (1minute) comment on why they were pro/con, THIS poll alone would've taken 832 minutes to read.
Now, if you subtract all the pro votes, yeah, you'd cut it down to just a little over an hour - the problem is, you'd have to at least BEGIN to read each comment, to know which way they were leaning. Wayyy-y-y too much time to spend on reading comments. (And, that doesn't even take into account people that commented, yet didn't vote).
I figure it's so much easier to read the poll, vote, then look at how many idiots didn't agree with my POV - THAT'S a JOKE, everybody. Save your thumbs for wind direction!
For the record, I voted no.
For the record, I voted no. Funding terrorism via ransom is counter productive and only encourages a wholesale hostage business.
I have just one comment on
I have just one comment on this..... First, I voted NO as in hell no. Second, when I was growing up I remember frequent airline hijackings for ransom here in the US by both domestic and international thugs. They mostly stopped except for 9/11 (which was a very different hijacking which didnt involve ransom) do you know why? Well because we and most western nations stopped negotiating and stopped paying ransoms.
It does work but that doesn't console the hostages families or friends when things end badly. Most that are in danger of kidnapping and being held hostage, choose to be where they are and what they are doing. I dare say they would even agree with our policies on ransoms as well. That's just my opinion...
To pay ransoms and negotiate is to enable those terrorists to do it again and even builds up their psyche to think that they can get away with this. Again this is a generalization and very basic opinion. This topic is one of those that doesn't easily fit into back and white definitons.