--- Scribe1865@xxxxxxx wrote: > In a message dated 3/14/2004 11:03:05 PM Eastern > Standard Time, > omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx writes: > > > As for Al-Quaida, I think that negotiations with > them > > will them be necessary, simply because no other > > approach is going to work. > > In my opinion, the US--regardless of who's > president--would only consider > negotiating with al Qaeda after many terrible > options had been expended. Hi Eric, Many terrible options have been expended - the invasions on Afghanistan and Iraq, remember ? They did not stop the Al-Quaida and they seem to have brought it into regions in which previously it was not active. European nations, given their economic and geographic situation, might well try to engage in some sort of secret bargaining Actually, I am not too sure that some negotiations between the US were not already conducted in secrecy. The US quietly fulfilled one of the Al-Quaida demands, to withdraw the troops from Saudi Arabia, and it's a bit odd that there were no attacks on the US soil since 9/11. Anyway, the Al-Quaida is not going to be appeased by such small beans as the Europens could offer. One of the differences between the AQ and the IRA is that the IRA has been around for a while and it has largely transformed into a criminal organization, so that its willingness to stop the terror activities may stem from the wish to protect its 'businesses' in drug dealing, racketeering and the like. Al-Quaida does not seem to be interested in money for now, only in political power, and that only the US could supply. O.K. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html