Umm… none of those things. We’d just send in Kurt Russell.
I realise it was just a hollywood movie, but in Air Force One didn’t they have a system in place to remove the president from the Office of President? then the kidnappers would simply be holding just another US citizen (although one that used to be Pres.). Anyway, I’m not really into how the US government operates, so can anyone shed any light on this?
As for negotiating…a few weeks ago a british hostage tried to escape, got caught and was beheaded. The UK government refused to negotiate, but it turns out that they had paid a middle man who in turn paid another middle who paid someone who knew some of the kidnappers and eventually 2 or 3 of the kidnappers were persuaded to help the hostage escape. Unfortunately they were caught and the hostage was killed. While all these negotiations were taking place and money changing hands Britain insisted that they would never negotiate with kidnappers. Is there a difference between paying the kidnappers direct and paying middle men? Surely there would have been more chance of securing his safe release if they had simply paid the money to the kidnappers? then again, i accept that paying the kidnappers would encourage more kidnapping, but if you say your not going to negotiate or pay a ransom then thats exactly what you should do. Now the hostage is dead, presumably so are the guys that tried to help him escape, and the middle men have a few extra $$ in their bank accounts.
The Pres should just issue an Exec Order banning kidnapping. 
I agree with Zagadka…anyone managing to kidnap the Pres deserves at least respect for being ABLE to do it (no respect for kidnapping, just for being able to get through all the security)…even if you don’t pay a ransom you should pay them a $10 tip for being so clever.
Well, a good portion of the country would be shouting “Keep the bum!”, but that’s not even specific to this administration.
Air Force One likely had it right in that the 25th Amendment would be invoked, the Veep made Acting President, and the ship of state would continue to sail. I rather doubt any concessions would be made. The major bargaining chip would be “give him back and we won’t bomb your ass into the stone age.”
I have no doubt that the US would not hesitate to negotiate in secret and pay out the nose. Whoever is clever enough to pull off the job is savvy enough to know that we’ll do it in secret. If they forced us into public negotations, then things might get a little more dicey, but we’d probably still negotiate. If the demand is unreasonable (a few nukes or blow up the Statue of Liberty, say) then all bets are off and POTUS is on his/her own. Not negotiating is generally a good policy, but I don’t think making an exception for the POTUS is unreasonable. Of course, someone is gonna get nuked at the end of all this.
Probably Iraq, regardless of where the kidnappers came from. 
We have a Vice-President.
Life goes on.
the POTUS will be too big a trophy to be traded in for money. better to brainwash him, have him grow a beard and or speak arabic etc.
I would hope, as human beings, we would not even.
He is our president, and we should care about him.
So what if the Canadians (or Belgians) decide to arrest and prosecute him as a war criminal. :dubious:
It would probably be easier to occupy Belgium than Iraq. 
Only if the president had a cassette tape of jazz music that we had to get back.
And only if Ernest Bourgnine was there to help.
There would be massive destabilizing effects between the United States & Friends and whoever sides with Canda/Belgium, trade would plummet, economic warfare, military threats et cetera.
It wouldn’t happen.
This sort of impulse is why the rescued Pres. should not be reinstalled. His personal trauma would color his thinking too much in determining the response.
Frankly, we need a Standard Operating Procedure, to stop emotional overreactions on the part of those silly enough to take kidnapping the POTUS too personally.