Canuck57 wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...

ANY attempt at negotiation will CAUSE future incidents so logically
should not be considered. It is all well and good to feel for the
family of the hostage but we also have to feel for the hundrerds of
potential future hostages. This logically means no negotiations. You
may call being logical asshole behavior but it works better than
emotionalism.
Saving the hostage should be secondary to minimizing future
incidents. I do not see any way out of that and I dont think you can
either.
----------------------------------------------------------

Negotiation does not necessarily mean paying ransom or allowing them to go
free.
If that was going on, this incident would be over by now.
Negotiation can also be wearing down the pirate's resolve and making them
realize that they have no other option but to surrender. I am not there
or privy to what the negotiations are, but I suspect the latter is what is
going on.

Eisboch

Agreed. Here is how the negotiations should go.

If the captain dies, so do you.
If the captian survives and we get him back, you live to see a trial.
If the captain dies for any reason, we will not accept your surender but
will feed the sharks.

Then sit an wait, repeat the message as needed.

If buddies try a recuse of the pirates, blow them out of the water.



If this is a four step plan, it works for me.



--
"John H" wrote in message
...

Please note that Interstate 90 will be closed this weekend across
South Dakota. This closure will allow the Federal Government free
access to haul a 200 ton piece of coal to Mt. Rushmore so that
President Obama can be added to the Presidents on the monument.
--
John H

--

John Herring, rec.boat's resident racist.

(Tip of the hat to Don, who reposted this gem so I could see it.)