Rich, being an annoying sort of guy, I’d argue back that it’s more incumbent on those arguing against any dialogue to explain how the current silence advances the US’ strategic goals. It doesn’t seem to be helping so far. I’m sure we both agree that one of the problems faced in dealing with Hezbollah is the Ho Chi Minh trail that runs to Teheran and Damascus. With Teheran in the grip of a profoundly dangerous religious maniac, the better hope in cutting off at least part of that supply line lies with the thug now presiding over Damascus. He may be untrustworthy, he may be a tyrant, and he may be a murderer, but he does, I assume, define self-interest in ways that you and I can understand. It won’t be easy, to put it mildly, but it should be tried. When I read that the reason the US has not made any renewed overtures to Syria is because there were no indications that anything “constructive” (a term that begs a little definition) would come out of it, I despair. Diplomacy is difficult, and it takes time. At a time when the US needs allies (remember that upcoming Iranian nuke), there’s also something to be said for very public demonstrations of the willingness to go that extra mile even if it doesn’t work out.

As for why Syria hasn’t been making any overtures, that’s easy. The new situation in the Lebanon means that it hasn’t had to.