The current Israeli govt has no experience or drive and thus cannot efficiently make critical decisions like this.. Gone are the days of powerful leadership that Israel once enjoyed over its arab neighboors.

They want the Golan from which they would threaten and pester Israel as they did before and in June 1967. Strategic land for sham peace can't work in this instance. Besides it's virtually impossible for Israel to give up the Golan, all the way to the 'de facto lines of 4 June 1967'. There may be progress toward peace with Syria only when Syria accepts a territorial compromise in the Golan because they would accept and be satisfied with peace for itself; i.e. peace for peace.

This goverment must go all they care about is their legacy and Money not Israel's security.

No Israeli gov't should have the authority to offer territorial concessions without a referendum.

So anything they are considering is a pure waste of time. And if Olmert moves forward he will have to quadruple his personal security detail.

Those are the facts, any territorial claim by Syria is an absurd one. As it would have NO historical basis. Syria can talk and say what it wants, it has no legitimate claim to the Golan. End of the confusion, Condi spend time elsewhere, on more pressing matters. Like Darfur , or Zimbabwe for example.

Those are the key words from the government officials' point of view... "Olmert could benefit from any positive diplomatic movement on the northern border after a scathing report on his handling of last year’s war in Lebanon." Not that Israel could benefit. Of course not. But "Olmert could..." Their cynicism is just disgusting. Anything obtained in exchange for the Golan or any Jewish land would be temporary, at best. A piece of paper, that's all Israel would get for it. If Syria wants war, that piece of paper won't stop it. It won't stop their wars by proxy either. There's no evidence that land for peace ever works. What guarantee does Israel have that either Jordan or Egypt will keep their word in the future? They have regimes struggling to stay afloat among a sea of Islamists making steady progress in the takeover of the Middle East. And Islamists would not respect past agreements. Just like they wouldn't respect any agreement between Palestinians and Israelis. No more land for appeasement, Israel. If Olmert dreams of raising his popularity ratings, he should not give up land, but should listen to his people instead, and stand firm against US pressure. That would give him a measure of respect from Israelis and the world.

Why talk to Syria? You know what they want. If you don't intend to give back the Golan, why bother talking? It'll only give them another opportunity to make propaganda to the effect that Israel is "intractable" and doesn't want peace, ergo Israel has a lot to lose and nothing to gain. Of course, you could offer the Golan in exchange for Haniyeh's and Nasrallah's heads on a platter; bellydancers for the presentation ceremony to be furnished gratis by Lebanon.

The idiots say the same lines of crap over and over: "road map" peace with Syria" "dialogue". All the arabs give Israel is rockets and hatred. All the Israeli government does is blow hot air (no action, no real decisions). All the Israeli public does is yawn as war comes to their doorstep. You are all morons.

Gee, Israel's top-notch politicians are at it again. Assad would give anything to express his friendship for Israel. And Rice has a track record for helping us into..oops, I meant out of, tough places. What I don't get is when a US representative talks to an Arab leader that hates America, has always sided with its enemies, why does Israel always end up getting shafted? When AMerica wentr to war in Iraq, they came REAL close to war with Syria. MOst of the weapons and people America went in looking for fled to Syria.