with the death toll from last week's earthquake nearing 30,000, & 100,000 homeless in Bam, Iran, a team of doctors from the U.S. arrived to offer assistance. This is in addition to 150,000 lbs of aide already sent. Iranian President M. Khatami has said that this would not alter political differences.

Should the U.S. continue to allow its citizens to offer their assistance in light of this comment, and Iran's Axis of Evil status?

Yes, the US should do everything it can to help these people. This isn't a political issue, it's a human issue. I am thankful that our government is extending its humanitarian hand and thankful to those US citizens who have gone to Iran to assist with recovery and humanitarian assistance.

The easy answer is "yes, of course". It's our nature to be helpful and compassionate.

The more important question, though is this: is interaction better than isolation? Are places like Iran, Cuba, North Korea going to be better off in the future as we increase contacts with them instead of decrease them? Should we figure out MORE ways to increase contacts and commerce with these so-called "evil" countries?

Yes. The people who are suffering in Bam are not a part of the "Axis of Evil." They are victims of a catastrophe who have little control over the actions of their government, and even if our assistance does not effect the U.S.'s "official" position with Iran, it still effects the way that the individual citizens view the U.S. We don't want them to see us as "The Great Satan," which is what the hardline government presents us as. We want them to aspire to being more like us and to work towards reform.

I think this is a great political and humanitarian move. The United States has the ability to provide this type of help and this is the type of international activity we should be modeling whenever we can. For the people who see American help rushed to them in their time of need there must be a strong sense of gratitude.

This could be an opening to a new path of diplomacy with Iran and a trend of improving relations. Earthquake diplomacy might be the beginning of a peaceful transition in the region.

And if none of that proves to be true, this is simply a good thing to do. This is my second strong word of praise for a Bush administration official in a week, surely a record for me. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage deserves credit for picking up the phone and offering help.

Iran-U.S. Ice May Be Thawing (CBS)

I'm not praising the Bush administration at all for the move. Like he really had any other choice? Like he could say "well, I've said they're part of the 'axis of evil' so in order to not look like a hypocrite, I shouldn't help the Iranian earthquake victims out?" Please. Anyone in his position would have done the exact same thing. The backlash if he hadn't would have destroyed his re-election chances. There's nothing to praise him for. He did what he should have done. Why should you praise someone for doing the only possible thing he could have done?

The U.S. sanctions against Iran and a failed attempt in 1980 have prevented us from directly offering aid in the past, but we did send some money through the U.N. last year when Iran had another devastating earthquake. Bush's administration could have taken the same route, but they didn't. We are sending personell and supplies into Iran. The Bush Administration didn't have to do that, and they deserve some credit, IMO.

I personally was always confused as to why Iran was a member of the "Axis of Evil" in the first place. While nobody would call Iran an enlightened or forward thinking regime, they had elected a secular moderate who has been struggling with the Religious institutions in the country for some modicum of reform. He has not succeeded as the west had hoped, but at least, unlike most other nations in the region, there was a leader who was trying, elected by people who wanted change.

Further, Iran's human rights record, while deplorable, is still better than erstwhile allies of the US such as Saudi Arabia. Iran's status as axis of evil simply backed them into a corner, and put them on the same level as Iraq and North Korea, which was a silly thing to do.

To say he could only have made this choice is bogus. He had alternatives. Just because he chose the path that you can't crucify him for doesn't mean he gets no credit.

But, he's not looking for attaboys anyway. Certainly not from the likes of any of us. Nah, he answers to an authority a wee bit higher than that. He did what he felt was the right thing to do, much like other decisions he's made.

BTW, anyone care to comment on Iran's refusal to accept help from Israel? Or is that the topic of another debate?

Of course continued aid should be allowed.
Our problems with Iran lie with the hardliners.
The rest of Iranians are for the most part indifferent to us. They don't hate us they don't love us. sending help is the right thing to do.
Plus it shows that we are friendly. Remember that during the 70's and 80's the mullahs or whatever made a point of trying to get the iranian women to have lots of children to build the army to fight the west. Iranian women not being stupid (Hmm lets see stoned to death or pregnant?) had lots of kids. 70% of Iranians currently are 35 or younger. Many of these are very tired at not having the freedom to live their lives as they see fit. They wish to be able to build their society up again and not be under the thumb of the hardliners. Instead of damn silly speeches about the"AXIS of EEEEEVIIIILLLL" we should show we are sympathetic to those who want freedom. Mostly however help those in despair.

I agree with the majority of members posting...Bush's administration did the right thing by sending professional help, aid, and lifting the sanctions for 90 days that allows people to send donations. It is the Iranian leaders that are the problem and not the people-even if they are brainwashed and hate us.

Since there are various sanctions on Iran, I believe President Bush would have to authorize the temporary lifting of them before aid (physical and financial) could be sent to Iran. His decision was compassionate, but I do believe that other Presidents regardless of party would have also responded in a positive manner...that's what the U. S. A. is about...helping others when they are down.