[kahljorn]

YOU think of them as criminals. I don't-- that's just american bias. If they are willing to submit to a truce in which the safety of americans could be secured, I could care less if he blew up some trade towers. We blow people up all the time. It's all part of war. I'm sure they call us criminals and worse.

If he offers a truce, we accept, and then attacks then there'd be no reason for all the other countries to back him. However, if we don't accept and he attacks it means absolutely nothing other than we were still at war. An actual breaking of diplomacy would, politically, cause alot more than just an attack alone. Then they will be considered unreasonable and unappeasable. I think, even if you want to destroy them, in the end a truce would work out better in more angles than one.
According to him they are capable of blowing shit up now, regardless of if we make the truce or not. Might as well go for his political assassination and diplomatic negation-- thus giving us excuses for whatever we do.

Anyway, i don't care either way. I just think it'd be more interesting the other way around.