Obama changes the U.S. position on hostages!

Ralphy1

Ralphy1

Well-known Member
Ransom can be paid for hostages now without the fear of prosecution. This seems like a good thing but critics fear that it might lead to more hostage taking. Methinks that it is a good change and surely you do, too...
 

The government will not be paying but families may now do so without fear of prosecution.
In reality some families have already paid ransoms and none have ever been prosecuted.
 
Yes, but it is better not to hold the sword of prosecution over their heads. BTW, should I be held for ransom would you donate for my release?
 

QuickSilver said:
ahemmmm.. back to the op.. Does anyone think this change in position will encourage more hostage taking?
Click to expand...
Yes, of course it will. And the root of the problem is that Americans, with their misplaced national hero complex, seem to think nothing of placing themselves squarely in harm's way. If you get yourself snatched from someplace that you had absolutely no business being in the first place, be it on your own head (for as long as you keep it, that is).
 
I understand that no news outlets are allowing ground coverage in syria... which is a good thing, but won't stop other "do gooders" from going there to "help".
 
oakapple said:
I would pay a ransom for somebody that I loved and worry about the prosecution afterwards, not before I got them back, anyway.
Click to expand...

Many say ransom payments encourage hostage taking and/or have the terrorist coming back to the same family/victim for more because they know you scarfed up the money somehow someway.

Many auto mechanics do this with your car. They see you pay just one big bill and before you know every succeeding trip costs more and more.
 
Here's the problem IMO....Most of these kidnapped people are people that work for the news agencies, some are volunteer health care workers,some are really stupid tourists.

These people KNOW they are in hostile lands so Im suppose to feel sorry for them....naw
 
AZ Jim said:
Universal donor here Type O+ but you get NONE Ralphy.
Click to expand...

Sorry.... the universal doner is O negative... Meaning there are no antigens on the Red cells to create transfusion reactions.. You are RH+ therefore you carry the RH antigen.. I do not. I am O-


The universal recipient would be AB+.... that person would carry all the antigens and therefore can accept any type blood.
 
QuickSilver said:
I understand that no news outlets are allowing ground coverage in syria... which is a good thing, but won't stop other "do gooders" from going there to "help".
Click to expand...

I've always wondered why do-gooders can't find enough good to do right here at home. After all, we have hungry children, sick people without medical care, homeless people, disabled vets, etc., etc., etc., here. Don't see why it is necessary to go into overtly hostile territory to do good. I know this sounds very cynical, but I wonder what it costs the US to rescue, or attempt to rescue, do-gooders . . . .

I DO believe that ransom-paying encourages more hostage taking. If it works, they'll keep doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top