Latest Breaking News

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)

43. Sorry, but...

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 06:44 AM

Sep 2014

it's tragic that the Sotloffs and Foleys have lost sons to terrorists. Paying the ransom of hundreds of millions of dollars to those terrorists would only ensure that many more families lost sons or daughters. The American (and British) policy of not paying ransom to terrorists has a sound basis. Americans and Britons represent less than 10% of persons kidnapped by Al Qaeda and affiliates. The reason for that is that they know the USA and UK won't pay ransom, and they target nationals of countries that will pay.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sotloff's parents told they could be prosecuted for paying ransom to IS [View all] Sopkoviak Sep 2014 OP

It's against our laws to send money to terrorists. Must be very upsetting for the family. Sunlei Sep 2014 #1

This country has REALLY lost it's way and no longer respects the people of the country... diabeticman Sep 2014 #2

They could have paid the ransom delete_bush Sep 2014 #3

Not sure it would have been that easy for them to do. Who would act as an intermediary? Regardless still_one Sep 2014 #10

And that's the other part of my point. delete_bush Sep 2014 #19

Would you have voted as a jury member to convict them? Hoppy Sep 2014 #45

No, I would not. delete_bush Sep 2014 #46

.... 840high Sep 2014 #8

Tremendous loss for the families Iliyah Sep 2014 #4

We made a prisoner swap with the Taliban. former9thward Sep 2014 #16

+1 candelista Sep 2014 #49

TERRIBLY misleading headline! Fox Newsworthy!!! But it implies criticism of the Obama WH so... George II Sep 2014 #5

You have other information then? Sopkoviak Sep 2014 #11

The implication is that this took place after his execution whereas it took place months before George II Sep 2014 #12

Well of course it took place BEFORE HE WAS MURDERED!! Sopkoviak Sep 2014 #17

Are you deliberately being obtuse? George II was commenting on the HEADLINE... Turborama Sep 2014 #56

Despicable. Psephos Sep 2014 #6

Jesus H - fire this guy. 840high Sep 2014 #7

I would have opposed prosecuting them bluestateguy Sep 2014 #9

There are thousands of more lives at stake based on what ballyhoo Sep 2014 #14

The Europeans pay. former9thward Sep 2014 #18

The UK doesn't. (n/t) Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #42

Yeah, 125 million dollars so far from France and Spain. Mosby Sep 2014 #53

Exactly; thank you. nt babylonsister Sep 2014 #27

terrorism should not be rewarded with ransom money eShirl Sep 2014 #13

And what do you have to say to the families? Brigid Sep 2014 #15

Sucks to have a son who places himself in danger in a war zone where his capture is prized, Fred Sanders Sep 2014 #20

Unbelievable. Brigid Sep 2014 #21

And how about when they use the ransom money to kidnap and ransom 10 more Americans in his place? chrisa Sep 2014 #22

The exact logic behind the federal law. Fred Sanders Sep 2014 #23

And how does this federal law deal with grieving families? Brigid Sep 2014 #24

It prevents more grieving families by preventing more kidnappings. chrisa Sep 2014 #25

In other words . . . Brigid Sep 2014 #26

Choosing not to put a bullseye on every American is hardly "nothing." chrisa Sep 2014 #28

Not buying it. Brigid Sep 2014 #30

See this link: chrisa Sep 2014 #32

That's still the official line. Brigid Sep 2014 #34

The "Official Line" has perfectly sound reasoning behind it. It recognizes the disastrous chrisa Sep 2014 #35

When We Torture Prisoners StevePaulson Sep 2014 #41

Should businesses pay protection money to the Mafia? jberryhill Sep 2014 #33

Businesses have another option: Brigid Sep 2014 #37

Giving Money To Terrorists StevePaulson Sep 2014 #40

If rather pay and get my kid back christx30 Sep 2014 #48

How would you feel if that money was used to kidnap.... ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #57

With the deaths of the headcutters. n/t christx30 Sep 2014 #58

Yep StevePaulson Sep 2014 #38

Sorry, but... Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #43

"Hundreds of millions"? candelista Sep 2014 #50

The ransom demand was for $132 million. Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #51

We are only supposed to say "sucks to be them" about Iraqi and Syrians FrodosPet Sep 2014 #36

Hopefully customerserviceguy Sep 2014 #52

Paying ransom creates a market. What jihadi wouldn't want flamingdem Sep 2014 #29

Which failed spectacularly. Brigid Sep 2014 #31

Really - Furious Huh? StevePaulson Sep 2014 #39

Didn't the Administration just trade 5 gitmo detainees for Staff SGT. Bergdahl? Sopkoviak Sep 2014 #54

Bergdahl was a POW. Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2014 #59

So you contend Sopkoviak Sep 2014 #60

Bergdahl was there because the US Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2014 #61

That's quite alright Sopkoviak Sep 2014 #63

Wake Up billhicks76 Sep 2014 #44

My many years on DU have taught me to question single sourced "new" stories. This one 's from Yahoo mulsh Sep 2014 #47

I would have paid the ransom then dared them to prosecute. LoisB Sep 2014 #55

I would have done the same, if it were my child, and dared them to prosecute. politicaljunkie41910 Sep 2014 #62

Intellectually, I agree with the no ransom policy but this is a terrible situation for all concerned bklyncowgirl Sep 2014 #64

I'm with you karynnj Sep 2014 #65