Hi, Charles (don't know if/when you'll read this, but...)
I want to offer a couple of (I think) relevant thoughts on the whole bargaining/arms for hostages thing. I'm not trying to explain that I'm right and you're wrong, I just offer for you thought/comment.
Firstly, in character, the battletech universe is a place where ransoming lost equipment is not unusual. Justin Xiang in Warrior: Riposte remembers a warrior offering a bottle of Palos champagne as a ransom to have his mech returned to him. I may be wrong, but I believe that's the reference. We are in the Clan era where that probably isn't as common as it used to be, and admittedly having someone threaten to shoot a downed mech definitely isn't as clearcut a comparison, but this person isn't Caesar, as an example, who has been known around this area of the Periphery for killing people simply as a distraction.
Secondly, more out of character. I believe I understand your comparison to the Israeli's or to no negotiating with terrorists. The pragmatic problem that our group faces with drawing the line and accepting the possible/probable death or destruction of one of our mechs rather than allow a single enemy mech to withdraw the field is that our forces are outnumbered by those of the universe. While we're trying to replace the lost warrior/mech, we may be struck by someone else, someone we will desperately wish additional numbers to face. (of course, there are other forces on planet we may be able to get assistance from, but same point).
Anyone else who wants to comment, feel free, but I'm not trying to attack here, just offering thoughts.
Thank you,
John (who would love to sign the message Bully, or Kowalski, or Grandmother, or number one Grandson, but isn't going to push his luck THAT much)
