Would you negotiate with terrorists?

[robvalue]

Imagine that one of your loved ones has been kidnapped. You have been sent proof of life and a ransom demand for a large amount of money. Between you and everyone you know, you can just about scrape the money together but it will leave you broke.

The people holding your loved one are unknown, as is their location. Experts have no advice or assurances they can give you. You have no guarantee whatsoever that if you pay the money, your loved one will be returned, except the word of the kidnappers. The way you pay isn't important, but you can assume there's no chance of catching them this way.

Would you pay?

[brewer]

Nope. If they are that smart and callous, why would they let the hostage live?

[Joods]

I don't know. There's too many "what if" factors, for me. Too many red flags about the situation that doesn't jive. Also, it would have to depend on which family member was kidnapped. There are a number of them who I would happily let die at the hands of a terrorist. Yeah, I said it.

[FatAndFaithless]

These kinds of questions are always a little wonky for me. They're so far out of the ordinary that I don't have a frame of reference based on behaviors I know I've taken. We could talk about the tactical best ways of approaching a situation from a rational point of view, but as far as how I'd act...really couldn't say.

[abaris]

Of course I would pay if it's the only chance. I can't imagine anyone not doing it and throwing their loved ones to the wolves.

[Divinity]

Are we talking Terrorists or Kidnappers here? I'm confused.

I'd pay. The life of any of my children or grandchildren (even the son I don't get along with) is worth more than any money. Of course if I ever discovered their identity, I'd destroy them and everything they love.

[Chad32]

It depends on a few things. If the person has a history of kidnapping people, then I wouldn't pay them, because obviously that's not going to stop the kidnappings. If they don't have a history of it, then I probably would pay up, because this guy might not have the mindset that kidnappings and ransoms are worth the profit. They might just be doing it out of desperation, and won't make a habit of it.

Then again, if it's like a tradeoff, where we have one of their guys, and they have one of ours, then I'd be more willing to make a trade.

[Godscreated]

Of course I would pay if it's the only chance. I can't imagine anyone not doing it and throwing their loved ones to the wolves.

The wolves already have them and wolves have no mercy. To pay will embolden them by giving them a sense of sucess, this is the last thing you want to do with this type of people. If no one pays they will quit risking their lives for nothing. Wolves would rather attack the weak, the strong present them with danger and injury. I understand, when it comes to loved ones we want to do all we can, I'm not saying this wouldn't be the hardest decision anyone would have to make but, at some point the wolves need to be stopped from preying on us, so why not at the start. We might not save a loved one but we could help others by not rewarding the wolves for their bad behavior.

GC

[Minimalist]

Define "terrorist."

[abaris]

To pay will embolden them by giving them a sense of sucess, this is the last thing you want to do with this type of people.

So you would do the "right" thing and let them perish for the "greater good". Either you're really as despicable or you're not honest with yourself.