As the Title suggests this examines the Quote from a 2002 Speech by an American President to one from a British Foreign Secretary a couple of days ago.
More recently, things have escalated even further as a US Carrier Group makes it's way towards the Gulf. This is how several Scenarios lead to WW3.
From "Axis of Evil" to being "on the Brink".
So how did we get here?
The recent Protests and State response in Iran which has caused the current Crisis where Diplomatic Missions in the middle East are evacuated and the West readies for War with Iran did not happen in a vacuum and started years ago with GWB.
Even the AI on Google agrees in response to the Question: "Did "Axis of Evil" cause the conservative backlash in Iran?" here was the response......
"Yes, George W. Bush’s foreign policy, most notably his 2002 "Axis of Evil" speech, is widely credited with fueling a conservative backlash in Iran that crippled the domestic reformist movement.
Key impacts of the Bush administration's approach include:
Empowerment of Hardliners: Bush's rhetoric provided Iranian radical Islamists with a powerful political weapon to use against their modernist rivals. By framing the U.S. as a persistent existential threat, conservatives revived militant revolutionary language and sidelined reformists like President Mohammad Khatami.
Stalling Reform: The "Axis of Evil" label was viewed by Iranian political elites as a "betrayal" of the cooperation Iran had provided during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. This shift eroded the ability of reformists to argue for transparency or moderation in foreign and domestic policies.
The "Axis of Evil" Impact: The speech sparked immediate outrage across Iran's political spectrum, uniting both reformists and conservatives in condemnation. Analysts note that while public support for reform remained high, the conservative "Old Guard" successfully used the perceived American hostility to seize the political initiative.
Long-term Shift: This backlash contributed to the eventual rise of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, marking a significant departure from the more cooperative era sought by reformists earlier in the decade."
So the Situation in Iran that threatens to draw the whole World into WW3 began 24 years ago with a Speech by the US President of the time.
Something many of us have been very critical of in the years since.
What I'm saying here is a reformed Iran was exactly what the Iranians were working towards 25 years ago - without the risk of a regional, or even a global, War - until their task was made next to impossible by a misguided and ignorant Speech by an American President in 2002.
A Speech that ignored recent History the Presidents own Father was involved in.
To lump Iran in with Iraq was extremely erroneous given how they had fought a brutal War with each other in the 1980's - during which America and others supported Saddam. Iran remained neutral during the 1990/1 Gulf War and did not support Saddam at all.
To compare them to North Korea was even more erroneous as it ignored the Fact that traditionalist Muslims don't like Communists. This was exactly why America supported the Mujahedin in Afghanistan as they fought the "Communist Infidels" of the Soviet Union and their own Government. Or why the Soviets supported the Marxist Government in Kabul and were fearful of the Islamic States in their own backyard.
Both Foreign Policies happened when GWB's Father was the American Vice President.
24 years later you have an Iraq where many Shia Muslims are as loyal to Tehran as they might be Baghdad, an Iran who now probably does have dealings with a Nuclear North Korea, and a Geopolitical Alliance with both Russia and China.
Instead of a reformed Iran that could have happened without Bloodshed.
And one that doesn't now face the Risk of Civil War like the one that raged in Syria for nearly 15 years. Except this one would happen in a Country that could sever the Persian Gulf from the rest of the World, flatten pro-Western Arab States, severely damage Israel, and is far bigger and geopolitically far more significant to their Allies.
The Chinese angle .......
A lot of gung ho Idiots might think that putting pressure on Iran acts as a choke point to China but Chinese Oil imports from the Gulf Region amounted to half it's total Oil imports in 2024.
Any destabilisation in Iran threatens to render the Straits of Hormuz completely unnavigable which would include Shipping to China from all the Gulf States. Would Beijing tolerate such a huge disruption to its Supply?
The gung ho Lunatics might think it's a good thing if that happened, but here's why it wouldn't be.......
China supplies America with 50% of the USA's medical needs including essentials like Gauze, protective supplies and basics like Ibuprofen.
The EU is even more dependent - relying on China for up to 95% of its ingredients for Drugs like Anti Biotics.
There are many other Areas of Industry where China has become a huge supplier of Goods - from electrical and consumer Goods to EV's, Telecoms and heavy engineering - and while importers are trying to become less dependant on Chinese Products it won't happen overnight, Factories, Foundries and retooling can take years to develop, while the resulting economic conflict would merely add to the Tension.
And this doesn't include the growing standoff involving Taiwan, the world's biggest supplier of microprocessors.
All of this at a time when supply chains are under more strain than they have ever been since WW2.
If People think Price increases have been steep in the last 4 years what might they be if the Situation in Iran escalated?
None of this helped by what is happening in Venezuela and elsewhere.
In both "Threads" and "Countdown to Looking Glass" - Films that deal with the Preamble to Nuclear War the Scenarios start in Iran, but the Threat now is more real than even the most realistic of Films.
America was always worried about the Soviet Union taking control of Iran's Oil - which is why they deposed Iran's leader Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. They continued to supply Iran with Weapons until the Islamic Revolution toppled the Shah'ist Regime in 1979, after which they were concerned that the Soviets would move on Tehran to establish Geopolitical and economic Links.
Russia now has very firm links with Iran - being the main provider of Nuclear Technology - while Iran has supplied Moscow with Weapons used in the War in Ukraine. A lot of this in response to western Foreign Policy with both Countries. In better times Russia acted as guarantor to Iranian compliance with the JCPOA Treaty. As the Situation deteriorated that no longer applies.
WW2 started with Conflicts in various Parts of the World gradually merging with each other, from the Far East to North Africa, Spain then the rest of Europe - and finally America.
We are seeing the same thing happening gradually now and Tensions don't seem to be easing. Conflicts in Eastern Europe, North Africa, the Arctic Circle, the Far and Middle East and Latin America.
Unfortunately any World War resulting from these won't end with Victory Street Parties in Trafalgar and Times Square, or Red and Tiananmen Square depending in which side you are on.
They will end with nothing - because no one will win and everyone loses everything.
And also ........ How about the Iranian People themselves?
Given what happened in Iraq after Saddam and the brutal Pogroms against Alawite Muslims and Christians in Syria after the collapse of the Assad Government has anyone considered what could happen in Iran if the same thing is done there?
Alawites - including Women and Children - were slaughtered in Syria by Agents of the HTS Government even though they had nothing to do with the Assad Regime. Christians were murdered despite Jolani's assurances of religious Pluralism. So how about Iran after 46 years in it's current form and anyone who is accused of being involved with the Government? Given the Slaughter in Syria would the new Regime bother to establish Guilt or Innocence?
Then there was what happened in Iraq after Saddam, where Maliki's Government imposed discriminatory Laws against Sunni Muslims regardless of any or no involvement in the Ba'ath Party.
They endured everything from suspected Complicity to accusations of Terrorism and lost many Rights including those to their own Property.
The potential for a terrible Pogrom in Iran should the Government fall is quite real and could kill, maim and displace 100's of 1000's.
Do Nuclear Weapons guarantee Peace .....?
No they don't......
Within a couple of years of their use on Japan Nuclear Weapons did not deter the Soviet Union from their blockade of Berlin. Neither did they prevent North Korea - with Soviet and Chinese Support - from invading the South. They did nothing to stop the Warsaw Pact clampdown on the Protests in Poland and Hungary in 1956 and did not dissuade North Vietnam from pursuing their Aims - again, with Soviet and Chinese Support - in Indochina against Saigon, the French and Americans. The same applied in Czechoslovakia in 1968, the various Cold War Crises of the 1970's and the Soviets War in Afghanistan.
Indeed, it could be argued that they nearly caused World War several times during all this ....
General MacArthur wanted to use the Bomb on North Korea and China but, thankfully, was prevented from doing so by President Truman.
The Cuban Missile Crisis pushed the World to the Brink by mutually provoking both America and the Soviet Union. Khrushchev wanted Missiles in Cuba because America had them in Turkey, both of which would have rendered any early warning Systems useless by their Proximity, and there were People in X-Com who were prepared to launch a full scale pre-emptive Attack on Cuba in response to the Weapons that were there.
Nixon wanted to use them on North Vietnam but cooler Heads prevailed.
More recently, the UK might have had the Bomb but it did not prevent the Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands, even though Polaris could very easily have been launched from a Submarine off the Coast of Buenos Aries.
It was the prospect of a Nuclear Strike by the West created during the Exercise "Able Archer" in 1983 which nearly prompted a full Soviet Response.
Both India and Pakistan have Nuclear Weapons, but their continuing and occasionally violent Spat about the disputed Kashmir Region has never ended.
Both China and the US have the Bomb but neither have prevented the other in the continuing Jostle over Taiwan. Nukes did nothing to prevent the provocatively unthinkable recently when the Speaker of the US Congress Nancy Pelosi crossed the diplomatic Line and recognised Taiwan as an independent country. The proverbial Third Rail in Sino-US Relations.
Israel now has Nuclear Weapons, but this has never prevented any incursions against them since, or the huge Iranian Response to their Assault last year (2025).
So it could be argued that the very existence of Nuclear Weapons might actually cause War and even the Doomsday Scenario. They induce a sense of Complacency which neglects other Solutions.
The Cold War started when Truman wanted to scare the Soviets by using a new Atomic Weapon in 1945, which merely hardened Attitudes and guaranteed that Moscow would begin work on their own Bomb rather than a Spirit of Conciliation between the former WW2 Allies.
It wasn't until the Missile Crisis of 1962 when the potential use of Nuclear Weapons became horribly apparent that work started to be rid of them with the first in a succession of Treaties governing them.