Hostages Released but at what cost?

If you are stupid enough to believe this, then it didn't cost a thing (in terms of money anyway).

The office of President Roh Moo-hyun Friday indirectly denied news reports
alleging that the South Korean government has paid a hefty ransom to the Taliban
in return for the recent release of South Korean hostages.

"There is no secret agreement with the Taliban other than the already announced
conditions for the hostage release," Roh's spokesman, Cheon Ho-seon, said in his
daily media briefing.

We've all heard this kind of denial from public officials in the past so take it with a grain of salt. I just wonder how long it will be before the lie is uncovered on this one.
At any rate, they have 'promised' to bring home the few troops that South Korea has there and additionally will not send any more missionaries into the country (Which I expect to be enforced about as well as the traffic and parking laws) yadayadayada....WHAT A BUNCH OF WUSSES....tell me I'm wrong! Make me eat my words Prez Roh!!

This is the only time when I could say that I wish the propensity for breaking contracts found in many aspects of this society would manifest itself. Why not? We told the Taliban that we are going to give them everything they want (except money...puhahahahahaha) and get what we want for a while (hostages back) then do to the Taliban exactly what has been done to thousands of foreign hagwon teachers for years....break the contract....and just to show 'em who's the hagwon owner boss:
1. Try to ascertain where the Taliban that kept the captives are by questioning the hostages and then send an additional 2000 combat troops into the areas to hunt down the Taliban (and get our money back) and hold them hostage for a month or so and make them watch D-war, 동방신기 (DongBangShinGi) and 바다 (Bada) for a couple of days, they'll be so confused they won't know what to do.
2. Then, just to be spiteful, have the government sponsor two or three planeloads of proselytizers to go there and administer some humanitarian aid under the protection of another 1000 or so troops.

Why should we do that? We promised that we wouldn't?

1. Because a promise made under duress of this sort is not a promise it is a survival instinct and therefore needs not be kept.
2. The Taliban is not a government entity and to even give them the political time of day is wrong in too many ways to count.
3. Because there comes a point in the history of a country where it is time to at least ask for a kiss before lubing up and bending over for this kind of thing. (first the NORKS, then the Nigerian militants, and now the Taliban, who's next?)
4. Otherwise it's just to bloody embarrassing