Question re ransoming hostages versus aiding famine victms

[Proud Cosmopolitan]

Before I sign off for the night I find I couldn't help but be curious about this hypothetical scenario should the governments of Western countries use $1 billion that they pooled to ransom 1000 hostages all from Western countries or to feed 1 million starving African children?

[The Voice of Time]

Before I sign off for the night I find I couldn't help but be curious about this hypothetical scenario should the governments of Western countries use $1 billion that they pooled to ransom 1000 hostages all from Western countries or to feed 1 million starving African children?

Your scenario doesn't contain enough facts, like possible consequences to not paying, and whether there's a chance we can rescue them. I'd say freeing 1000 people we know sounds very tempting, but I'd wait until I know for certain what other alternatives I have at my disposal, I would also have to consider the potential value of 1 billion dollars in the hands of the enemy, and whether that kind of financial backing could greatly endanger future operations of military, economic and diplomatic nature.

[Proud Cosmopolitan]

Before I sign off for the night I find I couldn't help but be curious about this hypothetical scenario should the governments of Western countries use $1 billion that they pooled to ransom 1000 hostages all from Western countries or to feed 1 million starving African children?

Your scenario doesn't contain enough facts, like possible consequences to not paying, and whether there's a chance we can rescue them. I'd say freeing 1000 people we know sounds very tempting, but I'd wait until I know for certain what other alternatives I have at my disposal, I would also have to consider the potential value of 1 billion dollars in the hands of the enemy, and whether that kind of financial backing could greatly endanger future operations of military, economic and diplomatic nature.

I meant this as a who would you allow to die question for anyone on this board who happened to be a "Singer esque utilitarian," since if the ransom is not paid the hostages would either suffer death or just extended captivity with possible severe torture. There is a chance the captors may be tired of holding them and release them of their own accord anyways.

[Proud Cosmopolitan]

The hostages are actually held in an Iraq or North Korea type situation where they were being arbitrarily detained by a rogue government who may want various "concessions" from the various governments of the hostages' home countries and the hostages would either die ( worst case scenario ) or be held for an extended captivity ( best case scenario) if the concessions were not granted. As for "feeding the starving children" a part of me may have a problem with that since they may go on to have more children that may starve in the future and encouraging more fair trade endeavours may be a better way to lend support to "emerging" read "developing" countries and as for "negotiating with rogue / terrorist regimes for the freedom of your captive citizens," aside from my concern that it may only incentivize the "rogue or terrorist regime" to kidnap or arbitrarily detain more people in the future, I may be okay with any sort of hostage negotiation effort or "diplomatic mercy mission."

On edit Iraq under So Damn Insane or oops Saddam Hussein and North Korea provided good examples for the precedents for the hypothetical hostage situation, since Saddam did arbitrarily detain people from Western countries before the First Gulf War in 1991 and North Korea was said to have abducted foreign nationals of various countries though the Americans were the only ones who happened to be from a Western country.

On edit, I also am erring to the side of "ransoming the hostages from Western Countries" since all right, I admit it's also good for countries to look out for their nationals abroad ideally if they achieve that objective by diplomatic means