Anti-Terrorism

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

Proposal:

No person shall negotiate with or capitulate to terrorists. If a terrorist takes a hostage, destroying the terrorists must take priority over rescuing the hostage.

Intent

This rule prohibits the government and private citizens from negotiating with terrorists. This is because the effect of negotiating with and capitulating to terrorists is the same regardless of who is doing it. To negotiate with or capitulate to terrorists must be a crime. The rule against negotiating and capitulating merely restricts the government and the citizens from doing what the terrorists want them to do. It does not restrict communication with terrorists, which may be necessary to help in finding and destroying them.

This proposed rule protects the government from enabling enemies of the people to continue the terrorist behavior. Any communication with terrorists must be for the sole purpose of finding them and their assets and destroying them and their assets.

Discussion

Terrorists use fear and guilt to manipulate people into capitulating to their demands. If terrorists succeed in causing people to give resources to the terrorist, terrorists will continue to use terror to get more, and terrorists will use these resources to continue to terrorize people. If terrorists succeed in causing people to give up their own freedom, terrorists will continue to use terror to gain more control over people.

If terrorists take a hostage, there is a moral dilemma because the saving the hostage may require negotiating with and capitulating to terrorists, or at least refraining from destroying them. Efforts to rescue hostages are noble and if it seems possible to rescue the hostages without negotiating with or capitulating to terrorists, then it should be attempted. However, destroying the terrorists must take priority over rescuing hostages.

Any attempt to blame the government for the injury or death of hostages that occurs while attempting to rescue them or during combat with the terrorists must be soundly rejected. It is the terrorists who are entirely to blame for any injuries or deaths that occur as a direct or indirect result of their terrorist actions.

Terrorists know they cannot influence people with honest and peaceful communication, and they cannot win by directly fighting the state’s military and law enforcement, so they attempt to win by manipulating the people using fear and guilt. Blaming government officials or employees or soldiers for the injury or death of hostages or any other victims of terror attacks benefits the terrorists because it would cause hesitation and muted action in the future, which will enable and embolden the terrorists to do more to harm the people.

[Author]

Posts