is it viable

a lot of rightwingers have been arguing that freedom can't protect itself and place "security" above freedom. now the obvious problem with this is that when you argue against freedom to protect freedom, you're defeating your own argument. your argument really becomes "freedom is bad"

so im thinking how can you protect freedom since sacrificing freedom is not protecting it and all i can think of is diplomacy, especially since i doubt "terrorists" view themselves as anti-freedom. maybe some people do but most people aren't voluntary tools. so really, the only practical way i can see to protect liberty is through diplomacy, because by fighting fire with fire in this situation you effectively burn down your own side

but how do you negotiate peace between radically different ideologies especially when one violates human rights