Yes friends, “axis of evil”
It seems President George W. Bush, in his January 29, 2002, State of the Union address was correct in describing Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as an “axis of evil.” President Bush coined the phrase to describe governments believed to be promoting terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction. Just over a year after those remarks, there was an international invasion of Iraq to dismantle that despotic regime.
At the time, President Bush received a considerable amount of criticism for the remarks, including from the Chinese government. “The Chinese side does not advocate using this kind of language in international relations,” foreign ministry spokesperson Kong Quan told a news conference in 2002. Of course, now the Chinese government has led in the building of sanctions against North Korea for their latest round of nuclear bomb posturing.
Michael Klare, professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass., writing in a February 1, 2002, column, suggested that Bush’s words would crumble under scrutiny. Klare said that we need to ask more accurate questions, like “How real is this threat?” and “Do we really face an ‘axis of evil’?”
Given the latest news in North Korea and Iran, how could it be otherwise? On balance, North Korea and Iran continue to pose the most dangerous threat to human dignity and freedom for its own citizens, and threatens peace around the world. However, with the international rise of socialism and totalitarian regimes, there are several nations whose citizens and neighbors are threatened, as well, but North Korea and Iran are currently leading the pack.
The Associated Press reports that North Korea threatened Wednesday to wipe the United States off the map, as Washington and its allies watched for signs that the regime would launch a series of missiles in the coming days. “If the U.S. imperialists start another war, the army and people of Korea will . . . wipe out the aggressors on the globe once and for all,” the official Korean Central News Agency reported.
Moreover, the world is watching citizens of Iran protest their dissatisfaction with the Iranian presidential election. At least 17 people have been murdered, and who knows how many have been injured by government law enforcement personnel, as Iranians have taken to the streets for justice. The Associated Press now reports that Iran’s supreme leader said Wednesday that the government would not give in to pressure over the disputed presidential election, effectively closing the door to compromise with the opposition.
I wonder what the 2002 critics of President Bush’s phrase think when they watch the YouTube footage of bloodied women in the streets of Tehran or when they read about China and Russia taking the lead in sanctioning North Korea? Perhaps President Bush’s 2002 words were somewhat prophetic.














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top53 Comments to “Yes friends, “axis of evil””
Bush was indeed right about the ‘Axis of Evil’. In fact at the time I thought it was such an understatement. I was hopeful he’d actually try to do something about North Korea. He should have, at least the people there are not so twisted by Islam that they’d have gone around killing each other after liberation as happened in Iraq.
Report comment to moderator
The rulers are evil, but they are not working in tandem — though, I suppose, they could each be taking advantage of what the other country is threatening. But George was right, they’re evil.
Report comment to moderator
“If the U.S. imperialists start another war, the army and people of Korea will . . . wipe out the aggressors on the globe once and for all,”
We heard the same blustering rhetoric from Iraq….
Are all despotic regimes so myopic and ignorant as to threaten world powers that could wipe them out single-handedly?
Report comment to moderator
Good post Anthony -
I known and associate with many from Iran. Persians know exactly what Iran is like, they lived there – they have family back in Iran. Those who are older who remember the days of the Shah, look back with sadness, because he was not a ruthless man. Those who are Believers remember how horrible it was to live in Iran – nothing has ever changed. The statement President Bush made after 9-11 was correct, and I might add it had nothing to do with furthering the hatred which is shown this country by Iran or the presidency of Ahmadinejad.
Contented-Joy – 1 – right after Bush took office he had to deal with 9-11. We certainly couldn’t get into another Korean conflict during that time, it wouldn’t have been wise.
Report comment to moderator
Iran’s overseas spy network is formidable. A synagogue was bombed in Argentina. The Khobar Towers attack in 1996, similarly has been lain at the Ayatollahs feet. From VOM and other sources (Freedom House, Amnesty International) we can learn a great deal about how these criminal regimes treat THEIR OWN PEOPLE. And brutal despots willing to torture and execute their own citizens obviously will not hesitate to lash out at perceived enemies abroad. Indeed, Cuba North Korea and other regimes can use the USA as whipping boy to justify domestic deprivations, failures etc.
The Nork regime is starving; its depended on food from SouK charity. The Panmunjom Nork guards are said to be the best fed in that entire country and they look like emaciated scare crow boys in baggy uniforms. The rantings of the Pyongyang dictator are akin to the mousy little fellow whose had to much to drink and suddenly thinks he’s 10 feet tall and bullet proof ready to challenge every man in the house!
Report comment to moderator
Not one post has challenged the “professor of peace and world security studies”. Glad to know this school doesnt offer fluff irrelevant majors!
Report comment to moderator
I think the GOP is the axis of evil –
Do you think that by saying so publicly I’ll be better able to persuade the GOP to abandon its evil ways?
Probably not …
Still, it feels good doesn’t it …
Report comment to moderator
Near the end of the Bush presidency, Iran had a holocost-denying leader and nukes, we were at war with 2 Middle Eastern countries, and our economy was in a shambles. These are facts. They speak for themselves; trouble is, few people want to hear what they have to say.
I’ve shared all I’m comfortable sharing on other threads, so I’ll leave it to you to figure out for yourselves.
Be well.
Report comment to moderator
And the veil prevails, as though no one knows!
Report comment to moderator
What a horrible human being you are Victoria. Because I am married to a former Muslim, now a Beleiver, and has compassion on his family in a war-torn country…”the veil prevails”?
How truely sad to be you.
Report comment to moderator
You have a lot of nerve posting to me in such language – “horrible human being” because I made a statement, one which has not one thing to do with your family – whoever your husband is, or religious background he did/does have has nothing to do with this thread or what I posted.
I am very grateful to be me, to know Jesus Christ as my Savior, to live in the United States – There is nothing sad about being ME, I wouldn’t want to be anyone else.
As I said you have a lot of nerve!
Report comment to moderator
Read the linked essay from Michael Klare. Recent currents have neither confirmed nor contradicted his article.
He didn’t question the brutality and threatening nature of their gov’ts. He did question the idea of an axis and the use of the word evil. The use or non-use of “evil” is linguistic and cultural and hence he concentrated on the idea of an axis or alliance. Iran, Iraq and North Korea were not allies. Iran and Iraq viewed each other with suspicion and as a larger threat than the US. North Korea did do some business with missile technology but it needed the hard currency and was more actively trading with Pakistan than with Iran or Iraq.
If Bush had pointed to Sudan, Zimbabwe and Burma as an axis of evil he would be just as accurate.
Bad regimes but no alliance — which is the point of Klare’s article and current events confirm the badness. However, Klare is correct, not Bush, in the use of the word axis.
Report comment to moderator
Post # 4, you’re right, but I’m still sad about it.
Post # 12, you’re also right about the inappropriate use of ‘Axis” and that Sudan, Zimbabwe and Burma would be just as accurate. “Evil” however does apply to all 6 regimes, linguistically, culturally and objectively. I am here talking only about the regime structure, not the regular people of those countries.
Report comment to moderator
I just love Contented Joy’s smile. Makes my day to see it.
Report comment to moderator
.
Nork and Iran are the axis of evil right now. And communism and muslim fascism are the axle greases.
Don’t worry about Obama doing anything for either country. I don’t think we have ever had such a coward for president.
In the past leaders in battle wore red shirts to hide the blood if they were wounded. Obama wears brown pants.
Report comment to moderator
DJ,
Try not to go for personal attacks. Victoria is a very decent human being from all indications.
How great that your spouse is a former repeat former muslim. It has to be tough on him to see how many in Iran are dying without Christ.
I repeat , Victoria is a wonderful person.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria is a wonderful person.
I am reluctant to describe people I have never met personally as wonderful or awful, even though I often have suspicions based on what they post (or what someone using their name posts).
Report comment to moderator
Thank you Montyfisherwoof, I appreciate your support
Report comment to moderator
Just as many Persians look back at the Shah’s reign with fondness, many look back to Prime Minister Mossadeq with fondness and regret. Because his is the first government which offered a real chance for democratic freedom in Iran, as opposed to a mere monarch puppet.
The Persian I am married to is a first hand eye witness to the brutality of the Shah—a brutality that makes Gitmo or anything our CIA ever dreamed of pale by comparison. Still, at this point, there is no doubt that a Shah or any other dictator —whether a puppet or not— would be preferable to a dangerous extremist like Ahmedinejad.
As for ‘the axis of evil’, I’ve already expressed my opinion on the ‘Cavalier President’ thread and I don’t want to be redundant here. Unless you can make an argument perhaps as to how it prevented another attack, I can’t see how it helped the situation in any way—but I can see how it could have reasonably acerbated the problem.
As arguably the most powerful nation in the world, we owe it to ourselves and to others to carefully consider our words and actions, because the effect of both are often more far reaching than we intend them to be. Whatever the final outcome, I am thankful that our current president is being judicious in his rhetoric, and is not indulging in self aggrandizing statements that many believe would be counterproductive anyway.
Report comment to moderator
“self aggrandizing”? You mean like, “This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”?
Report comment to moderator
I am in the middle of reading the “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” and I see where repreated failures to act against an aggressive Germany when in a position of superior strength was possible and Nazi Germany’s fall would have been assured with minimal loss, plunged the world into a world war with millons of people senselessly exterminated and brutalized. I shudder as I think of the political expediency being espoused by the “good” nations” of the world when before long it will be too late and we will have to face with deadly force nations who will be capable of carrying out of what are now idle threats.
Report comment to moderator
Yes Matt, that does sound self aggrandizing. I’m convinced that if ALL politicians could have their mouths firmly taped shut before they make a self-aggrandizing statement, the silence would be deafening. I guess I’m willing to settle for just ‘judicious’, especially when we’re watching video clips of people literally dying in the streets.
Report comment to moderator
Cakins,
You do have a valid point, though I’m concerned that we have so decimated both our manufacturing base, and our economy in general, that we may have a bit of difficulty fighting a third war. And even more difficulty paying for it.
Report comment to moderator
#19 In 2 weeks in 1979 the Khomeinist govt managed to kill more folks than the Shah’s govt had done in the previous 38 years!!
The Shah was more inept than perhaps folks realize. I liken him to Batista in Cuba. Batista let the Castro brothers have conjugal visits in prison prior to his granting amnesty to them and the other rebels, along with daily baths and lots of things no one in Castro’s gulags today could ever imagine.
The Shah merely sent his critics into exile in France. The Khomeiniacs executed many of the “founding fathers” of the Mullah regime (ie Saddegh Ghotbzadeh). The Groucho Marx lookalike President of Iran in the 80s Abolhassan Banisadr is an old refugee in Paris France
Report comment to moderator
That’s true Sawgunner. And personally, I do not believe that Islam is conducive to democracy in general. So, probably the best they’re going to do is another dictator—hopefully, one more aligned with the sentiments of most of the people. And if we’re lucky, one more friendly to us and Israel. (We can always hope.)
Report comment to moderator
#25 DJ, the Shah interestingly enough always had good relations with Israel. He played up the “We’re the two outsiders here” in a region dominated by Arabs. (Iranians are Persians and are offended when they’re called Arab).
I must agree with your assessmt. Secularists hate to concede this but our democracy’s vital heritage (JudeoChristian, GrecoRoman) is absent in most of the muslim countries. The Shah and Kemal AtaTurk ea had to drag their nations kicking and screaming into modernity and the Shah’s “brutality” was a bucket drop compared to the tsunami of oppression imposed by AtaTurk. Of course modern media wasnt there to film AtaTurk.
Report comment to moderator
When looking at the Shah of Iran one must understand that he was the first Muslim leader who recognized Israel - this information is very important. The Shi’a clergy lost much of it’s power due to the Shah’s reign, he didn’t hold to the idea of exclusion of Christian and Jews, of which he invited along with Muslims to the Palace for gatherings. Something worth noting, their was unprecedented higher income during the Shah’s reign.
Report comment to moderator
#27 Victoria, what I read was that the Shah was instrumental in pushing for OPEC to cut production/raise prices. So he may not have been the friend many made him out to be. But still preferable to the mullahs, beyond a doubt. He claimed to have had “visions” of “Islamic saints” (whatever they’re really called).
At the time of the revolution, many in the west said the Shah was being overthrown because reform and modernization (to include women’s rights for inheritance) werent happening fast enough. Later we realized he was pushing too much too fast and in doing so alienated the mullahs. In all the other muslim countries, the local imam is a paid govt employee (presumably controlled and monitored by his paymasters). Not so in the Shah’s Iran. It was a muslim country where the “church” was truly separate from the state.
Nice while it lasted I spoze!
Report comment to moderator
The difficulty with David Frum’s great phrase was that in the case of Iran it posited a unified national government. But as the events of the last week have demonstrated, there is a real diversity between the various segments of the ruling elite. Moreover, there also appears to be the usual cross currents of generation and social class at work as well.
So I don’t see the value in the categorical smear. A wiser policy is to understand who the internal players and how they might be appealed to. And here, I do have a smidgen of sympathy for Bush (and for Obama): we have lacked the human intelligence to accurately assess who the different parties are within the Iranian social structure, not to mention their goals. Lose an embassy, lose business contacts, this is what you get.
And back to Anthony’s point. I would disagree. The present regime of the Revolutionary Guards are acting evilly. Thugs generally are evil. I just wouldn’t mistake them for Iran.
Report comment to moderator
David Frum as a Canadian Jew wasn’t comfortable with the phrase “axis of evil” — he initially said axis of hatred.
Report comment to moderator
Axis of evil…axis of hatred….Either way, it’s the sort of thing to be said if you’re preparing an attack. It should hardly be surprising if it’s taken that way, particularly when it’s followed up with succeeding evenings of televised ’shock and awe’.
It would be nice if we now had a better plan than axis of whatever to deal with North Korea. I’m not quite sure what Obama’s strategy is…or if he even has one yet. A piece on Drudge indicated NK is threatening to use the nukes if we ‘provoke’. And it seems almost certain that their provoking actions are bound to lead to reciprocating provocation from us soon.
Report comment to moderator
“Victoria, what I read was that the Shah was instrumental in pushing for OPEC to cut production/raise prices. So he may not have been the friend many made him out to be.”
Friend? What has that got to do with it? Mossadeq saw Iranian oil… as Iranian oil. Not English or American oil. He wanted it to benefit Iran… That may be the real reason the coup was staged….
Report comment to moderator
MIM and Sawgunner
Oil has always been the center of the problem, I doubt anyone would deny it. The British were more than instrumental in bringing technology, equipment, trained personnel and ships for Iran. It worked very well until Mossadeq decided to short change the British after they had provided ALL of the necessary personnel, etc. That is when it became a problem.
The British cut off all the technology, ships, etc – Mossadeq was very angry over profits to flow to Britain – The English accused Mosadeq of violating legal rights “Anglo Iranian Oil Company – this ultimately shut down Iran’s oil, which put Iran in a crisis situation financially – The British boycotted Iranian oil.
Report comment to moderator
I’m sorry if the above post doesn’t read well – I wanted to comment, but don’t have the time to go into the whole subject.
Report comment to moderator
our current president is being judicious in his rhetoric
Our current president is a coward and an incompetent. His lack of a back bone and lack of knowing what to do is causing people in Iran to die. And sadly if the protests do not eventuate the overthrow of Ahmadinejad then so many people will have died, been maimed, and been thrown into prison in vain. In VAIN. FOR NOTHING
……. Sad-hezaar La’nat bar Sheytun Obama ……..
Report comment to moderator
I would like to challenge the poster of comment #9 to return to the thread and explain exactly, in detail, what she was referring to by her comment: The veil prevails, as though no one knows!
Report comment to moderator
Everyone can Google these days, so you really should cite your source.
A little honesty goes a long way. Too bad there is so little.
Report comment to moderator
DJ:
I appreciate your sensitive and insightful posts on this thread.
I do not believe the term axis must be construed as a formal alliance. The countries that allied in WWII under the term Axis did so formally through treaties, but the word itself describes a pivot point, or more accurately a line around which something rotates. Similar objectives and behavior, absent any formal treaty or even comity, that exert international pressure can be accurately desribed as an axis, and Bush was correct in his use of that memorable phrase.
North Korea has shared a lot of its nuclear technology with Iran and its proxy Syria. There is unquestionably an alliance of convenience between those counties.
Harris’s argument that since there are divisions within a government or nation, its international presence and actions cannot be categorized is without merit. No nation, no matter how unified they appear externally, is without dissension or controversy within. Despotic governments in particular are more likely to have unwilling and coerced citizenry, but the collective behavior of the country on the world stage is what concerns us when the topic is international relations.
Report comment to moderator
Wow. I haven’t been reading the blogs for a while now, but now that I’m back, I see a personal attack from DJ on Victoria. Why was this allowed to happen? Where is the moderator to this site?
DJ, you were wrong and way-out-of-bounds in your attack on Victoria. Please consider choosing another blog to post to.
Moderator…why no discipline for DJ?
Report comment to moderator
FYI, I’ve reported DJ’s attack on Victoria to the Moderator. I await some appropriate action to be taken.
Report comment to moderator
Ken,
I have not said that the regime is not evil, nor as I read him, did Harris. Rather I questioned the usefulness of the phrase axis of evil as it was applied to the neighbor of the country that we bombed. Not one person so far has advanced a plausible theory as to its usefulness. And I have suggested that it may well have been counterproductive. That is one reason I am thankful to see our president at least trying another approach.
Report comment to moderator
DAV
I have respect for the rules of engagement and the moderators on this site. If they see fit to ban me then so be it. But I have seen the hurting in the voices of the wounded left in the wake of Victoria’s cavalier and mean-spirited comments dotted throughout these threads and archives. And with all due respect, I have no intention of being among them.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
Honesty is IMPORTANT, before accusing make sure you KNOW what your accusing and WHOM you accuse –
You’re the worst accuser on the site. Take your own medicine.
Report comment to moderator
Correction: the worst acccuser who claims to be a Christian….
Report comment to moderator
If you Google ‘the veil prevails’, the first few sites that come up are titled in large bold letters: “For Afghan women, the veil prevails”.
Until Victoria brought the issue of ethnicity into the conversation in post #4, never at any time, on any thread, have I made or seen anyone else make any distinctions between the ethnicity of the peoples of Iran. They are all Iranians as far as I am concerned, and equally so.
However, as a previous poster pointed out, there is somewhat of a hierarchy to the ethnic makeup in Iran. And many Persians consider it an insult to be called an Arab—but to be called an Afghan is much worse. ‘The veil prevails’ comment is nothing but a cheap attempt at an ethnic slur made by a woman who claims to be quite aquainted with Persians and their culture.
Report comment to moderator
Any person who has a working knowledge of Iran and the Persian people is more than aware that they do not consider themselves Arabs, this is elementary – never a comment made in post #4 which would bring anyone to any other conclusion.
I don’t know anyone who calls an Iranian an Arab – but those who twist what is said could easily use it as an excuse to complain and criticize.
Whatever Iranians consider an insult is up to them, obviously they find a great many things to bluster about when it comes to their situation, not to mention the mess that was created since the Shah left Iran.
Afghanistan hasn’t a thing to do with any of my posts nor has my comment —- “And the veil prevails, as though no one knows!” —- there are words and phrases which anyone can dislodge from a variety of sources but it has no bearing on what I have written, which are my words, my beliefs on MY EXPERIENCE.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
Victoria – Maybe I’m a little dense, but I’m not quite sure what you mean by “the veil”. (I have a bad cold, which dulls the senses & the sense.
)
When I first read it, I thought of the “veils” Muslim women wear. But then I thought about the use of the word veil as in a metaphorical veil that keeps one from seeing God’s truth.
Which one did you really mean?
Report comment to moderator
Hi Karen
Read post 37 – Hope you feel better
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, Victoria.
Report comment to moderator
Good posts Victoria!
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!