I'm not sure exactly what category these recent negotiations with the fabled "insurgents" should fall under. The media always use the terms 'terrorists' and 'insurgents' in the same context. It makes for interesting considerations. For example, negotiating with the people constantly labelled as 'terrorists' makes for a fair and even parallel. "Either you are with us, or you are with the ones we will negotiate with if they come attack us a lot". Makes for a good honest parallel doesn't it? What can be construed from this? That there's a time for everything, including give-and-take negotiations with 'terrorists'? What do the natives say for that? "He speaks with forked tongue"? Why would it ever be ok to say one thing and then do another? Don't principles work best when they're in a contant state of continuity?