Mar 9, 2005

No more ransom for terrorists

The Sgrena incident has raised numerous questions:


  • How many bullets hit her car?

  • Did Italy notify the US military about the rescue mission?

  • Was the car carrying Sgrena speeding?

  • But perhaps the most important issue has been lost in the shuffle: Should Italy continue to pay ransom to kidnappers?

    Today's editorial in Opinion Journal puts it best:

    Not only does paying ransom encourage more kidnapping--of Italians especially--it also puts money in the hands of the enemy in a country where $40 buys an automatic rifle and $200 an attack on U.S. forces. The shooting of a speeding car at a military checkpoint in a war zone is an unintentional tragedy, but the paying of ransom amounts to a policy of deliberately aiding terrorists.

    We decided after 9/11 that our approach to terrorism had to change. Bombing aspirin factories was out. No longer would we treat terrorism like a criminal matter. When they pushed, we'd push back--harder. Italy agreed to back up up and send troops to Iraq.

    So what on earth is the point of spending blood and treasure on defeating terrorists, only to pay them off?


    We've all seen the videos of innocent civilians begging for their lives at the point of a gun. No one wants to see these people die. But paying off the perpetrators only eencourages them to kidnap again.


    Please, Mr. Berlusconi, end this policy now. BTW, Sgrena's kidnappers claim they refused a ransom for here return. Kind of makes you wander if the whole exercise wasn't pointless.


    Poor Nicola Calipari.

    Update: Michelle Malkin:
    The consequences of capitulation are bloody obvious. When you allow your people to be used as terrorist collection plates, the thugs will keep coming back for more. Might as well hang a sign around the neck of every Italian citizen left in Iraq.

    No comments: