Hope in Iran

There is still hope. I agree with many that I thought that Bush's Axis of Evil speech did not help the moderates in Iran. Moderation will continue in Iran, it just might take a little longer then it might have if Bush had calmed down the rhetoric. Though I believe we now must take care of business in Iraq, I don't believe for a second that it will led to positive change in Iran.

 

Worked like a charm for North Korea, though.

 

Checklist:

Iraq - evil
Iran - evil
N. Korea - evil

Looks like Mr Bush got it right.

 

Ian, really.

Didn't you know?? It's not the regime of Kim in North Korea that's evil. Oh, sure, they're engaging in nuclear extortion after they lied about breaking the Agreed Framework.

And of course, it's not the theocratic mullahs of Iran, who are working on a breeder reactor and are being dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century? Or rather, dragging dissidents kicking and screaming into confinement.

And certainly it's not Saddam Hussein, -- who kisses his picture of Joe Stalin before he goes to sleep at night -- whose depotic and thuggish actions have inflicted 25 years of endless misery upon his people.

Haven't you been listening to SuperDave and Loney? Don't think about THOSE folks!! Why waste your time worrying about them when it's George BUSH who is evil. That's right...Bush!! And it's the REPUBLICANS who are EVIL, you know, those guys in the party of Abraham Lincoln.

You know, how COULD we be so wrongheaded!! Tsk Tsk!!

Well, I am sure glad we straighted that out, doncha think??

Now don't worry your pretty head about any of this stuff about who's evil and whatnot. Dan and Dave have it all figured out for you.

 

Funny how before the election Bush couldn't name the leaders of these nations. Since then, he may not have learned who they are, but he digested the world's situation and found them to be evil.

 

International / Geo-politics for Dummys?

Please, Condie, give Bush the Cliff's Notes!

 

And why did they break the Agreed Framework, Karl?

Ponder the utilitarian nature of my earlier comment. I was making a factual judgment, not a value judgment. Since the subtlety of it sailed over your head like a Soyuz, I'll try again.

Calling North Korea evil was true. It was not wise. Made situation worse. We spoke loudly while carrying no stick. And by we, I mean, I don't remember paying my taxes so the West Coast could be in missile range of North Korea while the Resident farts around hunting down model airplanes in Iraq.

I'm serious. I don't remember paying my taxes. I'd better catch up on that.

 

The "axis of evil" comment is probably going to be considered one of the great blunders in American history. I have to believe he'd take it back if he could. With Bush, we have a man creating crises at a rate bin-Laden could only dream of.

 

Here's a segment from a CBC reporter about the people of Iran.

http://cbc.ca/dispatches/audio/011121_macdonald.rm

 

"The "axis of evil" comment is probably going to be considered one of the great blunders in American history"


Just as President Regan comment on Russia as the "evil Empire" went down as one of the great blunders in American history right?

When your evil your evil. There is no sugar coating evil it is still evil.

 

Bush names three countries as part of the "axis of evil." Then he begins plans to attack one of them. If you can't figure out why we're going to have real problems with the other two, it's hopeless. If after all the news from North Korea and the reports about Iran accelerating their nuclear program you still can't see a problem...

 

"If after all the news from North Korea and the reports about Iran accelerating their nuclear program you still can't see a problem..."

They were at this before the president called them the axis of evil. Maybe, that was why he called them that in the first place.

That is also why we have to deal with this now. Clinton let everything going on slide. See no evil, hear no evil does not mean their is no evil going on.

 

You're replying to BenReilly, I think. It's hard to tell since you don't know how to use the quote button. Assuming that's the case, what do you mean by

"When your evil your evil. There is no sugar coating evil it is still evil."

When his evil his evil? Huh? There's no verb in that sentence.

 

Labelling an adversary certainly can backfire - it may have - but North Korea simply does not respond in a logical fashion to usual tools of diplomacy.

But appeasement doesn't work here either. One point about North Korea - the dictatorship is contained by geography and because of a lack of internal factionalism (such as Iraq and Iran and Pakistan etc.) .... the situation is less complicated.

North Korea is like a child - if you don't respond to my fist slamming (by talking to me unilaterally instead of multilaterally) .. then I will rattle my sabre and start my puny reactors.

At least in case of NK - we have South Korea, China, and Japan to back us up on the multilateral stance. In fact - it would really be a huge mistake to talk with them unilaterally.

 

I agree that speech was a mistake.
Of course his assesment was 100% correct, but you don't lay your cards on the table like that.

 

unless your goal was to provoke

 

""When your evil your evil. There is no sugar coating evil it is still evil."

When his evil his evil? Huh?

You know exactly what I meant smart guy.

 

No they weren't.

 

Couldn't have worked worse than the current policy

Less complicated than what? If it's so uncomplicated, and they're evil, and we know they're accelerating they're nuclear program because they told us, why are we so focused on Iraq?

They're such children.

China? China?!? We're banking on China to have our backs?

 

eau contraire - the IC has been tracking these developments in the past 10 years in Iran, Iraq, NK, and we shall add Pakistan, India, China and a host of others. Bush may have chosen his timing poorly or properly but this had been building for some time - throughout and partially before the previous administration (since I get skewered for pointing out his name I won't) ....

 

"No they weren't.'

Yes, they were.

 

Really we don't. Your sentence didn't make any sense.

 

Actually, I really didn't, dumb guy.