GOATandYAMtheory:
are u not the Olodo here? Give us a link to where Buhari said he ld crush Boko haram within a month.

This nairaland is becoming tiring because of dick caps like you

Great job, Omenka.

talktimi:
Work for your money op, I would have been surprised if you actually had a contrary view to the actions and decisions being taken by your paymasters.

Ps: It's a done deal, boko haram are going to be integrated into the amnesty program by this administration

GOATandYAMtheory:
are u not the Olodo here? Give us a link to where Buhari said he ld crush Boko haram within a month.

This nairaland is becoming tiring because of dick caps like you

Great job, Omenka.

GOATandYAMtheory:
are u not the Olodo here? Give us a link to where Buhari said he ld crush Boko haram within a month.

This nairaland is becoming tiring because of dick caps like you

Great job, Omenka.

BLOTRS:
@Omenka, please answer this question sincerely and maturely. if either your brother, sister, mother or father dies as a result of bokoharam, or you loose your two legs to their bombs right now, would you still support negotiation? please reply asap

omenka:
Good morning.

This piece is meant for those of us who happen to be too naïve and ignorant to criticise the current government for saying they are "open to negotiations with Boko Haram".

I read on the thread concerning the subject matter the comments of some members in response HungerBad's comment especially that of Emeritus85 who stated "but Americans don't negotiate with terrorists". The only reason why people think American government doesn't negotiate with terrorists is because Hollywood made them believe they don't, whereas American government in reality might have engaged in negotiations and talks with terrorists, rebel groups and other non-state actors more than any other government on earth.

Just recently, a deal was reached between Washington and the Taliban for the release of a US soldier who's been held in captivity: This isn't Hollywood, this is reality!

Let us go a step further. A couple of years back, Israel, the closest US ally, (so close a US Congressman referred to her as "America's 51st state!" agreed to a prisoner swap with Hamas, a group labelled as terrorist group by both countries, that saw to the release of over 1000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli soldier, Gillard Shalit. Though Israel, we agree, is a sovereign state, anyone conversant with her relationship with the US would know the deal wouldn't have been made without some form of nod from Washington: www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/10/20111017221258366393.html

At the risk of making the post verbose, I'd like to refer you guys to this link which is a compendium of some of the deals that have been brokered between the US and some violent/terrorist groups : foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/03/the-u-s-does-negotiate-with-terrorists/

The US does negotiate with terrorists when it suits them to do so. The cost of an endless war is too much for a state to bear, hence they are constantly in search of ways to arrive at a peaceful resolution of such situations in the shortest time possible. It is the norm across the world. Nigeria isn't an exception.

In the past, Jonathan's administration had sought out ways of negotiating with Boko Haram, the only problem was that time and again, their negotiations fell through:

Who has forgotten the overtures made by Obasanjo, with approval from the government, at bringing the group to a round table?? These are but incidences that were public knowledge- what about all that happen behind the scenes?

It is only fair that we support this government in finding a lasting solution to this problem which seems to have defied a military approach for too long. We can sit behind out computers and criticise all we want but those who suffer a direct impact of the group's activities, including the families of our fallen heroes, understand the imperatives of solving the crises once and for all (I know some would call me a hypocrite, but I never criticised Jonathan's government's desire to negotiate). We can't shoot or bomb our way out of this situation- if talking can solve the problem, so be it.

Remember, the cost of peace is the price for a war not fought.


Cc: Lalasticlala.

ShowYourCertificate:
http://sunnewsonline.com/new/we-ll-crush-boko-haram-within-two-months-buhari/

This was during his interview with CNN's Christine Amanpour

agarawu23:
can you please tell us how much gej administration spent to fight boko haram if you with be specific + the loan he took too. thanks


relocating the military HQ to the troubled state isn't an effort ?

do you want the killings of innocent soul to continue? if you are among the ppl that lost their families and friends, will you say granting them amnesty or negotiating with em isn't a good move ?

you and your group claimed buhari was behind BH to make the govt hard for gej administration, is he also behind BH to make the govt hard for his administration too ?

will be Glad if you can answer me sir

GOATandYAMtheory:
All of you are quoting me only to give me the same link. In your links, he said 2months and the guy I quoted stated a month. It makes no sense the way you guys are praying for Buhari's failure. It will affect us all

GOATandYAMtheory:
are u not the Olodo here? Give us a link to where Buhari said he ld crush Boko haram within a month.

This nairaland is becoming tiring because of dick caps like you

Great job, Omenka.

The argument against negotiating with terrorists is simple: Democracies must never give in to violence, and terrorists must never be rewarded for using it. Negotiations give legitimacy to terrorists and their methods and undermine actors who have pursued political change through peaceful means. Talks can destabilize the negotiating governments' political systems, undercut international efforts to outlaw terrorism, and set a dangerous precedent.

Yet in practice, democratic governments often negotiate with terrorists. The British government maintained a secret back channel to the Irish Republican Army even after the IRA had launched a mortar attack on 10 Downing Street that nearly eliminated the entire British cabinet in 1991. In 1988, the Spanish government sat down with the separatist group Basque Homeland and Freedom (known by its Basque acronym ETA) only six months after the group had killed 21 shoppers in a supermarket bombing. Even the government of Israel -- which is not known to be soft on terrorism -- has strayed from the supposed ban: in 1993, it secretly negotiated the Oslo accords even though the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) continued its terrorist campaign and refused to recognize Israel's right to exist.

When it comes to negotiating with terrorists, there is a clear disconnect between what governments profess and what they actually do

Negotiations can sometimes be an exit strategy for terrorists who have second thoughts about their campaigns. But governments must always be clear that a full commitment to democratic principles is the price terrorists will have to pay.

Wildrage:
Only fools would be swayed by the hypocritical rationalization of the OP's fluid , unprincipled partisan logic carefully disguised as objectivity. Most of the decisions they ridiculed GEJ for are now considered as imperatives in the fight against the terrorist, yet they won't have the decency to first apologize for their earlier myopic and mischievous standpoint.

BLOTRS:
@Omenka, please answer this question sincerely and maturely. if either your brother, sister, mother or father dies as a result of bokoharam, or you loose your two legs to their bombs right now, would you still support negotiation? please reply asap

omenka:
Good morning.

This piece is meant for those of us who happen to be too naïve and ignorant to criticise the current government for saying they are "open to negotiations with Boko Haram".

I read on the thread concerning the subject matter the comments of some members in response HungerBad's comment especially that of Emeritus85 who stated "but Americans don't negotiate with terrorists". The only reason why people think American government doesn't negotiate with terrorists is because Hollywood made them believe they don't, whereas American government in reality might have engaged in negotiations and talks with terrorists, rebel groups and other non-state actors more than any other government on earth.

Just recently, a deal was reached between Washington and the Taliban for the release of a US soldier who's been held in captivity: This isn't Hollywood, this is reality!

Let us go a step further. A couple of years back, Israel, the closest US ally, (so close a US Congressman referred to her as "America's 51st state!" agreed to a prisoner swap with Hamas, a group labelled as terrorist group by both countries, that saw to the release of over 1000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli soldier, Gillard Shalit. Though Israel, we agree, is a sovereign state, anyone conversant with her relationship with the US would know the deal wouldn't have been made without some form of nod from Washington: www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/10/20111017221258366393.html

At the risk of making the post verbose, I'd like to refer you guys to this link which is a compendium of some of the deals that have been brokered between the US and some violent/terrorist groups : foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/03/the-u-s-does-negotiate-with-terrorists/

The US does negotiate with terrorists when it suits them to do so. The cost of an endless war is too much for a state to bear, hence they are constantly in search of ways to arrive at a peaceful resolution of such situations in the shortest time possible. It is the norm across the world. Nigeria isn't an exception.

In the past, Jonathan's administration had sought out ways of negotiating with Boko Haram, the only problem was that time and again, their negotiations fell through:

Who has forgotten the overtures made by Obasanjo, with approval from the government, at bringing the group to a round table?? These are but incidences that were public knowledge- what about all that happen behind the scenes?

It is only fair that we support this government in finding a lasting solution to this problem which seems to have defied a military approach for too long. We can sit behind out computers and criticise all we want but those who suffer a direct impact of the group's activities, including the families of our fallen heroes, understand the imperatives of solving the crises once and for all (I know some would call me a hypocrite, but I never criticised Jonathan's government's desire to negotiate). We can't shoot or bomb our way out of this situation- if talking can solve the problem, so be it.

Remember, the cost of peace is the price for a war not fought.


Cc: Lalasticlala.