Blair wants diplomacy and talks. Bush wants ultimatums and threats. Have I mentioned that I think Bush is a horrible leader?

Only about 6,434,234,961 times!

I wonder how the new democratically controlled house and senate will fix this?

Matt

__________________

The selective memories of lightweight journalists are a bane on Western Civilisation!

Bush and Blair had fundamental differences about the justification of the invasion of Iraq since day one. Bush didn't give a crap and the Bush policy was the one that is in play to this day.

This line of approach is integral and consistent to Blair's original position regarding the invasion of Iraq (the viewpoint ignored by Bush). It is to be noted that many (non-American) liberals were quite happy to support Blair's arguments for the invasion of Iraq (but NOT Bush's reasons).

Well first problem this is published by the Times...not much else needs to be said other than Bush like it or not is right...tell me again how successful itis to make deals with radical governments?

Given that the recommendation that the USA ought to formally meet with Iran has been on the table for many, many years - recommended by a wide variety of policy papers and think-tank proposals - including many on the 'rightwing' side and including James Baker's "Iraq Study Group", I think it is very likely to happen in the near future. Indeed, it is the ONLY possible path available for possible resolution of the Iraqi debacle.

It is interesting to note that in US foreign policy circles, it is explicitely ONLY the Bush-Cheney-Rice-neocon faction that has disparaged the value of engaging with Iran directly.

Like Lybia for example?

We already have historical, anecdotal evidence that isolationism doesn't work very well in the Middle East. Why would we want to repeat that mistake?

Can the democratically controlled congress force Bush to talk peace to our enemies?

How is 'talking peace' to our enemies going to solve anything -- especially in the Middle East? Do you think that waving white flags is going to resolve things?

__________________
"I miss the days when they made toys that could kill a kid."
- Jerry Seinfeld

I'm not too sure about that. I'm just reminded of how the Bush- administration has managed to stall any of these things for years already. "Just wait until after the election". Take the 911- recommendations, for instance. Or the Senate Intelligence report. No, I think this is another of those stunts by the Bush- administration to speak loudly about something for a while, and then do nothing and continue to stay the course.

We've heard the same thing earlier about Iran, as you say. But also Iraq, Libya at first, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Pakistan and North Korea in particular - name anything the cronies at the state- department have been doing for the last six years, and you find the same approach - talk about change, and then fail to do anything but simply not speaking to evil, staying the course, and expecting change in their "evil ways", to quote George himself. But Ghadaffi did play them on this, and gave up just about nothing in exchange for good graces with Washington. And it actually has been lauded by the Bush- administration as the one thing that did actually work with their policy, for instance. Their shills routinely defend that as a great success, too. Something in the line of how great the Lebanese democracy was.. at least for a while.

So it's not like this is anything new..

I always assumed the reasons for the same...

Have a link for Blairs reasons? I'd really like to read them...

cite a time that "talking peace" has actually worked sam

What about a Middle East Union?

Since the Arab League specifically excludes Israel as a deliberative participant, a more ideal scenario would involve the creation of a Middle East Union, with all member states deciding what is best for the region.

Peace does not equal surrender. Talking peace is coming to a mutual understand in order to stop the killing.

Every day that war does not break out are times when talking peace has worked. Those times just aren't as memorable as the times when wars are started.