I love the French...

[marct]

This story realy does speak for itself....

Chirac pooh-poohs Iran nuclear threat, then backtracks
Tehran's possession of bombs 'not very dangerous,' French leader told reporters
Last Updated: Thursday, February 1, 2007 | 5:27 AM ET
The Associated Press

French President Jacques Chirac said in an interview with three newspapers that Iran's possession of a nuclear bomb wouldn't be "very dangerous" and that if it used the weapon on Israel, Tehran would be immediately "razed."

Chirac — who made the comments during a Monday interview with The New York Times, The International Herald Tribune and Le Nouvel Observateur, a weekly magazine — called reporters back the next day to try to have his quotes retracted.

In an article posted on its website Wednesday night, the New York Times said the Monday interview was tape-recorded and on the record.

Chirac's initial remarks would mark a big departure from France's official policy of deterrence and work in preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

"I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record," Chirac said in the second interview on Tuesday, according to the New York Times.

More...

Marc

[Rob Thornton]

Marc, a related article I saw today took Chirac's comments a step further and mused about having to live with a nuclear armed Iran. I've read several related articles about Middle Eastern states considering pursuing the bomb as a reslt of Iran's progress and the inability to deter them, stop them, or general apathy about them possessing it.

You know I have not seen anyone really lay out all the security issues about Iran having nukes, but got to thinking about it as I read the story on "living with a nuclear Iran".

Its not just the power to deter attack on its own soil, it has incredible powers of psychological influence in this neighborhood. There is the obvious effect of its impact on hydro-carbons, but its effect on tipping the Sunni/Shiite & Persian/Arab equations throughout the AOR may be worth considering too.

I suspect the free world is going to look back on this and aportion blame to those who tried, but could not gain enough support. Many will ask the same questions they did on 9/11 - How did this happen.

I think about those who wish to believe that Iran is pursuing a nuclear capability for other then its weaponization, and I think its ironic that we will have to pay far more in the long run then if we had stood up when it was only a little painful, rather then wait until Iran becomes a nuclear bully, and one day makes a decision to use a nuke because they were never stood up to, and beleive their actions will have no consequence.

[Stan]

When his Ambassador to Zäire took a .50 round to the chest while watching the Bank fo Zäire being robbed by the Zäirian Army (across the street), and the Ambo's body guard was too busy reading a newspaper, which permitted his "client" to stand in front of a plate glass window in the first place; Chirac would later basically forgive the Zäirois for shooting him and expressed understanding that the shooting involved a civil war. Gee, I can understand that

So, if he now 18 years later can't see nukes, well !

Regards, Stan

[Rob Thornton]

Stan,
Yea, I know, but it still torques me that somehow it will come back as our fault. I've already seen some stuff saying that because of our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has been able to increase it prestige & influence. It amazes me how our own citizens can repackage something and gain happiness that it makes their own country look bad. I will never understand that, its like a self inflicted gunshot wound.

[Stan]

Evening Rob !
You bet ! I will be the last to understand. My sister is now dating a Ranger
He asks her all the time, "what is it with our folks towards the US Military ?"

I hope that the death of one of our soldiers never ends up being an admission of error or discourtesy.

That would certainly leave doubt in my 23 years of service.

Regards, Stan