As more details emerge about the execution of American journalist James Foley, it becomes clear that at one point, the US government had several options that could have saved the 40-year-old New Hampshire native's life.
Sadly, all of them would have involved making some potentially damaging concessions to the terrorist organization known as the Islamic State.
We learned yesterday that ISIS offered a $132 million ransom for Foley.
Now it seems that that was just one of several demands that the militia group made either in addition to or in lieu of the cash ransom.
Sources say one of the top items on the ISIS "laundry list" of demands was the release of Pakistani, MIT-educated neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui:
Dubbed "Lady al-Qaeda" by the American press, Siddiqui is currently serving an 86 year sentence in a Texas prison after being caught with plans for attacks on the US, some of which involved using the Ebola virus as a weapon.
The Obama administration reportedly refused to consider any of ISIS' demands, and instead launched a failed rescue mission over the weekend of July 4.
While some are praising the President for refusing to give in to terrorist demands, others are likening the situation to that of Bowe Bergdahl - a US soldier who was captured in Afghanistan and freed after the White House agreed to release five Taliban soldiers being held at Guantanamo Bay.
Critics claim that Obama's willingness to bargain for Bergdahl's release and not Foley's represents a form of baffling hypocrisy (or at least inconsistency) that had tragic results in this instance.