You talk to the leaders who are harboring them, at meetings of the UN. You get other countries to join in the discussion. It's not perfect, but with all the killing we've done, there are more terrorists than ever. You kill somebody's family member, chances are they'll become a terrorist. Wouldn't you want retribution? Let's face it, it's not working. The examples I gave of the Irish-Protestants and South Africa worked.
Oh yea, right.
Tell you what, you tell me how that works.
When was the last time that the Taliban, ISIS or Hamas has agreed to meetings at the UN, let alone anywhere?
The situations you mentioned are completely different.
The IRA was never a highly popular organization, and as the bloody civil war wound on the population in the areas got tired of it and pretty much told the IRA to make peace or they would go after them themselves. Militarily, the IRA never won any real engagements, and was on the run from both internal and external pressure. If they had not been loosing so bad, they never would have negotiated.
To bring in another example, the PLO was very similar. On the run both from Israel as well as Jordan and Lebanon they had little chance but to agree to peace with Israel. Now that peace is pretty much the only thing keeping them from being wiped out by Hamas.
In South Africa Apartheid was a policy of a government ruled by the national minority.
And to give an idea how worthless the UN is, they condemned Apartheid in 1962. And it only continued for another 32 years. Yea, the UN was real effective there.
You keep talking, but you still fail to make absolutely any sense. All of your arguments are based in fantasy, and not the real world.
Give me a real example that follows what you are saying. Name for me one single instance where a movement that was undefeated came to the peace table.
Because Ireland and South Africa sure do not meet that criteria. The IRA was pretty much dead for over a decade, and the SA government was barely limping along and the internal unrest was growing to the point where civil war would have broken out. Not unlike Rhodesia.
Yea, Zimbabwe is another example I guess. Civil war so bad and minority members massacred. Finally a peace treaty signed and terror used to achieve the result that the aggressors wanted. As a result, over 60% of the minority population fled the country of their birth.
Great example there, eh? You keep waving around Ireland and South Africa like they are magic talismans, not even realizing that they are disproving your points. In neither example did the aggressor nation simply decide to "give peace a chance".
