When It Pays to Talk to Terrorists

            In this op-ed, Americans remember the Munich massacre in which Palestinian militants killed 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team. This event played a pivotal role in shaping the American view on terrorism. The new outlook was that terrorists were murderous radicals determined to spread destruction and anarchy. Therefore, negotiation with such extremists was useless, so the only acceptable response was to crush them. As terrible as Munich was, the response from President Richard M. Nixon to virtually not recognize the situation did nothing to help. Instead, it ensured that the violence by the Palestinians would continue. This text was written by Paul Thomas Chamberlin, an assistant professor of history at the University of Kentucky. The context of this op-ed was the 40th anniversary of the 1972 Munich massacre. The purpose of this text was to not only reflect on the event, but show how the incident and President Nixon’s reaction affected and shaped our view on terrorism then and now. The audience for this op-ed is adult newspaper readers interested in history, politics, and terroristic activity. The rhetorical elements used were cause and effect, ridicule, and logos. It is clear that cause and effect were the basis of this op-ed. Chamberlin explains how the events then affect our mindset now. Also, ridicule is a clear rhetorical element because he is essentially criticizing the reaction of Nixon to the Munich Massacre. Lastly, the author uses logos to support and mold his op-ed into a convincing analysis of past event. In my opinion, the author certainly did accomplish his purpose in the text. He spent time thoroughly explaining the history and background that lead up to this event. Then he did a great job of analyzing how this event impacted our society as a whole. By reading this short op-ed, I was able to uncover the reason as to why terrorism was not addressed sooner. In a short response, it is because we were scared.