Hey , Let's Get This Out In The Open. . . Why Do Liberals 'Think' We Can Negotiate With Terrorists ? See more.

Question

This 'notion' blows me away and I shall prove to anyone with intelligence and an open-mind just how completely flawed it is. . . . . . . You Liberals have been trying to convince us Conservatives that your way is better than our way .. . . . and it ain't workin , now is it ? So how would you/Liberals negotiate with us/Conservatives ? Hmmmmm ? Gettin the picture yet ?
We stand on our ideology as you stand on yours . No amount of 'negotiating' is gonna turn a Pro-Lifer into a Pro-Choicer . None !! Or how about convincing us about your immigration ideology ? Hehe , good luck on that one . Is it startin to sink in ?
Now take people who are so filled with hatred that they want to kill us all . So much so that they're willing to kill themselves while killing others . Heck these guys don't even bother with escape plans and such . It's over when it's over and that's that .

How many of you still 'think' that terrorists can be negotiated with ?
Then

DIzzy one - Gee Dizz , try putting on your glasses and read at least one of the answers from my previous question. . . . or better yet , look at the answer right below you . BTW , further ******** answers from you and I'm gonna use Yahoo's newest feature . Now do you get it ?

Answer 1

I think Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda's #2 man, said it best in 12/06. He said the midterm elections were not a loss for Republicans or a win for Democrats, but a win for the Mujahideen - the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq. The terrorists know the Democrats are useless in the war on terror and will bow down to their demands. That's a terrorist's idea of negotiations - having their demands met. The first "suggestion" Zawahiri made was for the US to stop backing Israel. So much for negotiations!

Answer 2

One of the Far Left's tenets is negotiation. I'm a little surprised so many people here have not heard of at least one Liberal say we should try to negotiate. True, it's generally not publicly discussed because most Liberals are drowning out the negotiator types by being so defeatist!!!

Answer 3

You never negotiate with a terrorist. - And, no one has suggested - ever - that we should negotiate with any terrorist, anywhere.

Negotiations are needed with the countries of the middle-East who allow these thugs to train and recruit terrorist. Negotiations need to take place with Syria (the moron Bush won't talk to them----), Iran (the moron Bush won't talk to them either), Pakistan (the moron Bush won't talk to them). Talks must be held between the above countries and Jordan, Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other countries in the area to find a way to contain and control the terrorists factions. Unfortunately, our inept and incompetent administration has no one with diplomatic skills who could handle the talks. Bush is too stupid...he can barely make a sentence - and all he wants is the oil in Iraq anyway. Cheney is hated throughout the world and has no diplomatic skills anyway. Rice is a joke.

We have no credibility with these nations. All Bush does is demand....and nobody listens to him.

I fear that Bush is going to get just what he wants....and that is to drag this stupid war out until he leaves office - then he can blame someone else for it - and for any consequences. He has done that all his life..his Daddy and Mommy have always cleaned up after him....this time, it's going to be we, the people who have to do it.

The next administration is going to have a really tough time...but, at least we will have someone in office who isn't dumb and who has the smarts, skill and intelligence to put together a negotiating team of diplomats. They can then begin healing the relationships around the world and get the middle East together for some serious talks.

We wouldn't be in this situation if it wasn't for the "Bush/Cheney" team of thugs.

Answer 4

Anyone that sincerely beleives they can negotiate with terrorists is mentally ill. In the Cold War we always knew that in the end the Soviets would back down because we had enough weapons to destroy them. It was a policy the government called MAD. Mutually assured distruction. If they could not get off enough to totally eliminate us with one swoop they knew our response would destroy them so they did not go that route. They still valued their lives and the lives of their citizens. In the eyes of the terrorist - first they have no country so we can not just attack one place to kill them and they do not care about any one else or their own lives hence the suicide bomber mentality. We could unleash all our weapons on the Middle East and they would not care because they do not fear a death and annilation as the Russians did. Thus they will not give up anyting in a negotoation as would be requirecd, they want to have it all.

Answer 5

Terrorists cannot be negotiated with. Unfortunately, I don't think they can be completely annihilated and eradicated, either. Somewhere in the middle lies the answer. I think the best we can hope for is containment.

Answer 6

Take it easy there Doc. I don't think Liberals try any harder than Conservatives at trying to convince the other what's right.
Thank Goodness that neither side is quite like those willing to kill themselves to get their point across.......whew. Therefore, could it be possible that there is one thing that cons & libs alike agree on?! It would be a nice change.

Answer 7

Make love not war.There the one that want 2 take the 2 amendment gun control away.So we won't shoot any bad guys.That might offend them.Giving 20+illegals amnesty, all or social services & freebees, open borders. enforce only the laws against the citizens.all other get a pass.Non support of our troops after sending them to war. There not Dem's there defeats.Terrorists & negotiate in the same sentance. That hard to believe.

Answer 8

I've never said we should negotiate.. rather educate. And when I speak of education I don't mean the terrorists.. I mean the people who may one day become terrorists. At a guess (purely a guess.. but coming from a psych background I'd say it's moderately accurate) I'd say 90%+ of terrorists wouldn't be able to be broken from their mentality by anything short of brainwashing... so it's safe to call them a lost cause... at the same time if we are seen as bad as the terrorists then we are educating the population into an at best neutral situation where some people would become terrorists and some would swing our ways and others would just stay the hell out of it.... but that is a scale we can change in our favor... we can have more people staying the hell out or helping us hunt down terrorists.. and fewer becoming terrorists.. but you have to do that by winning hearts.. not with fear.

Answer 9

These answers are typical of libs. I see the term "straw man" has seemed to replace the "neocon" innuendo. I guess they finally wised up and actually read the definition of neocon. I love their cute little names they make for people.

For some really strange reason, not one of these liberals seem to understand that by the very statements their "elected" leaders have made and the very actions their "elected" leaders have attempted to take, and them following them blindly, it appears to the rest of us logical people that they are basically saying we can negotiate with the terrorists.
That is what is scary. They DON'T GET IT. WOW!

Answer 10

Earnest, liberal's "thinking" is so shallow as to be almost non-existant. These are the same people who believe that Castro was good for Cuba.
They want surrender for the USA, nothing more. They want to destroy the USA, so they can rebuild it in the fashion they want. Which is the main reasoning behind all the Al Gore theories which would destroy our economy, and that of all the eco-terrorists and their sympathizers. These are not thinking caring fellow Americans, they are the enemy within which will ultimately destroy America.