"Are you suggesting that the world is composed of: good guys, bad guys, guys who are part good, part bad guys?"

Well of course it is. Does anybody really believe otherwise?

When it comes to terrorists, when Osama Bin Laden was fighting the Russians he was doing terrorist stuff, but presumably he was seen as something of a good guy. Then there were the Contras of course.

As for state terrorism, Saddam Hussein was just the same as he is now, and had already gassed thousands of Kurdish Iraqis at the time when he was seen as the man to back in the war with Iran. And there was Pinochet, his agents even set off bombs that killed people in Washington, but he was still seen as a relatively good guy.

When it comes to fanatical fundamentalist regimes which oppress women and chop people's hands off and have public executions of people who offend against public morality by adultery or homosexuality, there's a distinction seen between the Taliban and the Saudi Arabian regime.

What it comes down to is the good guys include some pretty unpleasant guys, as is always the case. The bad guys probably include some people who would make much more plausible good guys, if things were set up differently. Those kinds of issues aren't too relevant when it comes to deciding whether to back them or not.

If it was some other government that wasn't seen as friendly, and it was doing the same things as Sharon, for the same reasons, there is little doubt it would be classed as part of that axis of evil.

That's just how it is. It's the way all governments play it, really. Except that in some cases they are more likely to admit that they are being pragmatic and cynical, and making the best of a bad job.