Rick Richman, writing in Commentary Magazine, has some.  He outlines some of the outcomes of such…negotiations:

1. the barbaric terror war against Israeli civilians, commenced after the first Israeli offer of a state;
2. the Palestinian rejection of the Clinton Parameters, after Israel formally accepted them;
3. the Palestinian failure to carry out even Phase I of the three-phase Roadmap;
4. the transformation of Gaza into Hamastan after Israel withdrew every settler and soldier
5. the election of Hamas in 2006 and the Hamas coup in 2007;
6. two rocket wars from Judenrein Gaza, and the continuing prospect of more;
7. the year-long negotiation in the Annapolis Process that produced still another offer of a state, from which Abbas walked away;
8. Abbas’s announcement in 2009 that he would do nothing without a construction freeze, followed by his doing nothing after he got one;
9. the continual “reconciliation” attempts by Abbas with the terrorist group he promised to dismantle;…
10. the violation of their express Oslo commitments[.]

Richman summarizes the futility of negotiating with terrorists at the outset of his piece:

…four years of the “Palestinian Terror War (mistakenly called the second intifada),”…disabused Israelis of the idea that the Palestinian leadership wanted a deal, and the fact that Arabs have become ever more candid about their ultimate goal, with Mahmoud Abbas telling Egyptian TV “he would never, in a thousand years, recognize a Jewish state.”

Negotiating with terrorists just gets more innocents killed.  Yet our SecDef nominee wants to “engage” with them, saying that Palestinian terrorists are misguided victims.  Our SecState nominee has said folks like al-Assad and the mullahs of Iran can be negotiated with.

On the other hand, there’s this:

A mouse is trying to argue with owls.  The mouse thinks their ways are wrong.  They think the mouse is dinner.

h/t Power Line