Idealogian

Negotiating with Terrorists

This week's episode of "24" made significant reference to the United States government's policy to not negotiate with terrorists, regardless of the circumstances (for fear that, in responding to and rewarding the terrorists, the government will encourage further acts of terror). I was able to turn up this official reference, and it certainly seems to be a commonly assumed stance.

While I definitely understand the policy in general, shouldn't there be a little wiggle room here? Shouldn't it depend on the relative severity of the demands and the threats?

For example, what if Al Qaeda threatened to unleash smallpox in New York City, unless President Bush agreed to wear a gaudy, fluorescent-green tie to his next press conference?

What if they proved they had a nuclear bomb, and promised to hand it over if Vice President Cheney subjected himself to a brief but intense session of tickle torture?

Granted, once you start making any concessions, you have to decide where to draw the line. But I think we'd all agree that wherever that line may be, my examples have not crossed it.