Okay, negotiations with "terrorist" usually give time to the strongest player to eventually handle the problem in some way. The "terrorist" doesn't win just because negotiations take place, like too many imply. The US had negotiated with the PLO, the Taliban, North Korea, Iran, or whoever else you want to use as a definition of "terrorist". Negotiations happen and at the end of the day the strongest side does what they do. Police negotiate with criminals until the police accomplish their aims. The US didn't just blow up the Somalian pirates without consideration, they conveyed that no deals would be made, messages were exchanged, time was taken, then the US acted. The US negotiated with the Nazis and Imperial Japanese to surrender. The US negotiated with "terrorist" in Iraq to turn them against others. Negotiations work for the strongest player, buying time is not defeat. Negotiating is not copitulating.