The prospect may sound absurd, but the possibility does exist.

PROLOGUE
How do we define evil? Is evil accurately defined as the bad things bad people do, or does it also consist of the bad things good people do, as well as the good things good people fail to do?

Can a corporation, nation or individual not, in today’s context, establish itself with a strong reputation that presumes goodness, and upon this platform, commit great evils, while successfully condemning rivals to an evil reputation?

Does the capacity to promote oneself as the good party not empower a party with a capacity to oppress a contending party by primarily positioning the contending party as evil?

Today, we see nations such as Iran, North Korea, Syria and Cuba being tagged as part of an axis of evil by the United States of America. What is common to these companies is their stubborn determination not to submit to America’s flawed concept of Freedom and Democracy. For this reason, the U.S. is determined that these countries must not possess a potent capacity to deploy nuclear weapons. Having such a capacity would equip these nations with a significant deterrent to any planned attack by the United States and it’s allies. (It must be noted, that North Korea, having already acquired the Nuke, gets a special respect from the USA, such that however great their intransigence, an invasion of or attack on North Korea is NEVER CONTEMPLATED!)

It should be noted that the earlier inclusion of Iraq under Saddam Hussein as part of this axis of evil created the backdrop for the decision of the United States and allies to invade the country without the full official backing of the United Nations and all its veto power holders, particularly Russia and China. The U.S. invasion of Iraq was actually a slap on Russia, which had significant alliances with the Hussein Regime. By invading Iraq, the U.S. was eroding Russia’s global sphere of influence. The unraveling of America’s bogus claim about Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction further emphasized the slight to the Russians, besides denting the credibility of the U.S. and Britain.
As a historical backdrop, it is noteworthy that the cold war victory of the West Bloc, led by the United States, over the East Bloc, led by the then USSR, had a lot to do with information. The Americans and western allies were able to present themselves in the powerful international media (which they effectively controlled) and the highly popular Hollywood movies (also very effective, James Bond for instance) as the good guys while the Soviets were the bad guys. It worked! Most nations were more willing to build relationships with the west than with the east. Many third world leaders developed a morbid fear of communism and socialism. Repressive anti-leftist regimes were unofficially supported by the western allies (e.g. Pinochet’s Chile and Mobutu’s Zaire).

As the post cold war era evolves, this strategy of calling a dog a bad name in order to hang it still seems very desirable to the West. It has been evident in much of the so called Arab Spring Revolutions, which may well be a CIA inspired social media driven strategy to remove middle east regimes that are strongly hostile to the U.S. How come there has been no Arab Spring in Saudi Arabia? Is the Saudi Regime democratic, as the Americans see democracy? What is the fate of Blacks, for instance, in Saudi Arabia? Does the non compliance of Saudi Arabia with modern democratic norms not sometimes get displayed when Saudi elite citizens enter the Western nations? Read the following part of an article on qz.com

However, those who have most reason to protest in Saudi Arabia, blacks, women and Shia Muslims, are not really a credible threat to the country. Simply put, there just aren’t enough of them. While women make up a large proportion of the population, the strict legislation surrounding a woman’s role in society means that fear of punishment has been enough to keep them from rising up with force. Last month, two prominent women’s rights activists, Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Oyouni, were sentenced to 10 months imprisonment for encouraging a woman to defy her husband’s authority. Shia Muslims, who have been punished by the Saudi regime for decades, only make up 10% of the population and, alone, they could never generate the required momentum for a revolution.
+
Anti-government protest is illegal and protestors are subject to imprisonment or worse. Last year, after a small number of Shiites in eastern Saudi Arabia were fired upon by security officials, the Saudi interior ministry claimed that they would bring an “Iron Fist” upon protesters (login required). Last week, another group protested and two Shiites were jailed for eight and nine years respectively for their involvement in anti-government demonstrations. Another activist was also imprisoned for 10 years for “inciting a rebellion” against the monarchy.
Also read
http:///4173625/slavery
http:///4173625/saudi-blacks

THE CRUX
The immediate situation that calls for this write up is the situation in Syria. As was the situation in Libya, there is grounds for skepticism as to whether the uprising in Syria can be described as a popular revolution. The popular protests that ousted Hosni Mubarak were unquestionably popular. So popular that the Military were reluctant to crush it, which they could have, but they did not want to have to kill millions of their own people.

While Ghadaffi’s Libya and Assad’s Syria were/are clearly dictatorial regimes, what people often forget is that Anti Western dictators need a lot of convincing to see resistance against their regimes as popular and not western sponsored/engineered. Where there is reason to suspect the latter, the rebellion will be crushed, as we have seen in Zimbabwe. This does not imply that such suspicions are usually genuine and hardly contrived. But in a situation whereby the U.S. actually states that it will arm rebels or as in Libya, stating that the Dictator in question should be killed or captured, the pureness of resistance can be questioned and dictators would conclude that the western involvement is purely for selfish reasons, with a disregard for sovereignty to boot. This increases the resolve of such dictators to obey survival instinct and remain in power by all means, even if it would cost the lives of their people. The people then become hapless pawns in the power struggle between their rulers and selfish western interests.
The Russians have a strong relationship with Assad. They are not any more convinced about America’s intentions in Syria than they were about Iraq and Libya. To worsen matters, Israel launched an attack on Syrian targets this year, with no strong condemnation coming from the U.S. or allies. Russia would be justified to see U.S. activity as aimed at further reducing Russia’s sphere of influence globally. That the U.S. has gone about these military interventions without seeking Russian or Chinese approval shows some element of arrogance on the global scale. The lies about Hussein’s Iraq provide a strong reason for Putin never to trust the west again.

The western allies are claiming Assad used chemical weapons against his people, but a U.N. official suspects that the rebels have done the same. The Russians, remembering the lies of Gulf War 2, have sternly warned the U.S. to exercise restraint and fully respect the U.N. process this time around.

What if Russia and China adopt a decision to do all they can to protect regimes they have a strong relationship with, beginning with Syria? What if they decide to be directly involved in protecting Assad’s regime, since the modalities for the intended western strikes would not have any more legitimacy than the case of Iraq and Libya.
Just WHAT IF?

Check other posts @ https://www.nairaland.com/zynzyn

US is obviously treading on dangerous waters quick to delve into situations that could potentially spell doom to world peace and keep acting like monkeys with grenade. Imagine what would happen if Russia and Chaina decide to stand up to them in Syria? Well watching situation unfold from a distance.

pimp_lucious :
US is obviously treading on dangerous waters quick to delve into situations that could potentially spell doom to world peace and keep acting like monkeys with grenade. Imagine what would happen if Russia and Chaina decide to stand up to them in Syria? Well watching situation unfold from a distance.

why not get closer?why watching from a distance?

mascot87:
why not get closer?why watching from a distance?

Whteva

Any scary scenario U.S. bullying can bring about is a Unity between Shiite and Sunni Islamic Radicals.

Murphy's Law: If anything can go wrong, it will!