If Qatar wanted to support terrorism, it's plausible the terrorists could pretend to kidnap those people. The hostages would suffer voluntarily due to religious reasons to make it look legit.
Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
11–20 of 59 posts
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#12This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.
I think it only matters what type of people are in charge. Democracy won't protect your country, only whether those who have taken an oath to defend the rule of law, their country, and their vote, actually do. See recent events.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-replaces-natio...
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#13This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.
petty grudge ... slight religious differences
Understatements of the century.
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#14This story reminds me of a book that I read a few months ago called "Never Split the Difference". It's a negotiation book by a former FBI hostage negotiator. I think the context of that book offers some color to this story, and I'd highly recommend it.
EDIT: I think the contextual question that arises from that book is: How does the idea of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" play out in multi-sided negotiations with such high stakes?
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#15This story reminds me of a book that I read a few months ago called "Never Split the Difference". It's a negotiation book by a former FBI hostage negotiator. I think the context of that book offers some color to this story, and I'd highly recommend it. EDIT: I think the contextual question that arises from that book is: How does the idea of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" play out in multi-sided negotiations wit…
Could you provide a short summary? I've never heard of it.
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#16If Qatar wanted to support terrorism, it's plausible the terrorists could pretend to kidnap those people. The hostages would suffer voluntarily due to religious reasons to make it look legit.
There's a lot of underhanded ways to fund terrorism that don't involve having your family kidnapped, like the US did with the Taliban by calling them freedom fighters or something against Russia - see also Rambo. It's easy for rich people or even a country to 'lose' money.
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#17This story reminds me of a book that I read a few months ago called "Never Split the Difference". It's a negotiation book by a former FBI hostage negotiator. I think the context of that book offers some color to this story, and I'd highly recommend it. EDIT: I think the contextual question that arises from that book is: How does the idea of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" play out in multi-sided negotiations wit…
Could you provide a short summary? I've never heard of it.
It lays out many of the basic principles by which the FBI negotiates with kidnappers. The author writes that the book is meant to first lay out the foundations, and then build on them to give the reader a toolbox (arsenal?) of negotiation strategies. An argument in the book is that these strategies work in business as well - I find this argument compelling. The title of the book is in reference to the fact that you can't split humans. The job of a hostage negotiator isn't to get half a human back by compromising. The negotiator has to get 100% of what they want, or the mission is failed.
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#18This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.
I think it only matters what type of people are in charge. Democracy won't protect your country, only whether those who have taken an oath to defend the rule of law, their country, and their vote, actually do. See recent events. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-replaces-natio...
While the type of person unavoidably makes some difference, it’s exaggeration to say it’s the only thing which matters. The structure of a government can require consensus. To use a named rather than implied current example, this is why the UK government spent the last two years paralysed over which Brexit to choose, either “hard” or “soft” — no consensus; and also why the process started at all despite the lack of specificity — 498/114 supermajority consensus in favour of some form of Brexit.
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#19This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.
petty grudge ... slight religious differences Understatements of the century.
Well for an outsider they are what they are, same as various branches and sects in christianity. In fact, most conflicts in human history look plain stupid for an outsider, but this happens when emotions and passions dominate the decision-making process
Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?
#20This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.
I think it only matters what type of people are in charge. Democracy won't protect your country, only whether those who have taken an oath to defend the rule of law, their country, and their vote, actually do. See recent events. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-replaces-natio...
Good systems are resilient to bad leaders. See the Roman Empire or England for example, neither has any shortage of bad emperors/kings and both avoided violent regime changes or subjugation by a foreign power for many hundreds of years (and counting in England's case)