Well,well, well!
:eek:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4627862.stm
Loudest sabre-rattling I’ve heard from a non-Bushoid source in years.
Where did that come from? 
Is this linked to the Iranian weapons program?
This really is nothing new. France has always reserved the right to use nuclear weapons at its own discretion, and has always refused to accept any limitation on such use. They’ve historically been pretty upfront about their “screw with us and we just might nuke ya” policy.
FWIW, when this happened in January the German editorials that I read all put this in the Iran context. Reports from the other European countries said governments were (off the record) dismayed.
This really makes me wonder. france has an extremely powerful nuclear strike force. It has large (multi-megaton rnage) nuclear warheads, which can be submarine launched, or delivered by bomber. Given France’s position with the arab/muslim world, the french must be taking the ravings of the Iranian president pretty seriously. Of course, i don’t think the Iranians are crazy enopugh to seriously threaten europe-they have nothing to gain and everything to lose. So suppose the Iranians manage to build a few low-yield atomic bombs, and attach them to their SHAHAB-III missiles-what next? They are well aware that, should they ever launch one, that will be their end. surely they are not foolish enough to do anything like this. rather, I think the anti-Israel ravings are intended to do two thins:
- prevemnt the USA from attempting military action in Iran
- reinforce Iran’s claim to be the leader of islam.
Nope, the Iranians are simply not stupid enough to risk war.
I really can’t think of any reason the Iranians would launch on the French. If they thought they could get away with it, they would launch on the Israelis. But that would be met by nuclear retaliation by Israel, so they would have to be willing to take enormous casualties, because the response would be massive. But France? Nah. Too much trade to be done there.
Could it be some diversionary tactic regarding the avian flu? Chirac vented his displeasure at the media about making a big deal of its arrival just the other day.
“I stand by my ethnic slur!”
As tschild pointed out, this is old news. The date on the page is Jan. 19.
Of course, if Bush had said anything similar, Bosda’s reaction would have been just a tad different.
Consider me thoroughly whooshed. What does that mean in this thread?
ralph124c: I don’t have as much faith in the Iranian leaders.
Heck I use to believe the US was the champion of right and now we have a VP who is pro-torture.
Jim
Let’s lay off the French, they have bigger balls than you think. Do a little googling on the French Foreign Legion, Algeria, Rainbow Warrior, and you’ll see what I mean. Their revolution preceded the American one, they prudently left Vietnam when the U.S. decided to get involved and they were nastier to the Algerian Muslims than Rummy could be in his wet dreams. It would behoove Americans to lose the narcissim and learn a little bit more about the rest of the world.
My Bolding
Just to clarify:
The French Revolution (1789-1795) was a period in the history of France.
Jim
Small nitpick. See this site. The Tready of Versailles recognizing the independence of the United states was agreed upon in 1783.
Events leading to open hostilities in the French Revolution began in May of 1789. The Bastille was attacked on 14 July of that year.
Yeah I knew I messed that one up as soon as I hit submit. Not being American, U.S. historical dates aren’t bred in the bone. Still, the French have grande balls and you’re website is pretty cool.
Mayor Quimby’s response when the French president threatened to nuke Springfield over a “frog” joke (and then followed through) in the Omega Man parody on one of the Treehouse of Horror episodes.
In this context, it means as much as any other obligatory Simpsons reference. 
eh… that would be your website Jim.
The Germans periodically kick their ass until someone pulls their nuts out of the fire if I may mix my metaphors. 
Small nitpick. See this site. The Tready of Versailles recognizing the independence of the United states was agreed upon in 1783.
Events leading to open hostilities in the French Revolution began in May of 1789. The Bastille was attacked on 14 July of that year.
Excuse the hell out of me for this stupid post.
I left to go eat dinner right after posting this same thing above. When I returned I saw the Preview screen, foolishly assumed I hadn’t posted it yet and hit submit. :smack: :o
I would appreciate deletion of the second post if possible. That way my carelessness in not making sure I hadn’t already posted it wouldn’t be hanging out for all to see forever.
% Meanwhile in France, a group of suited goons are sat around a long table.
We will show the stupid Americans who le clutzy frog, eh?
(his associates laugh, their necks inflating as they do so like that of
frogs)
Actually, it’s partly a novelty. The traditional french nuclear stance wasn’t limited attacks on specific targets, or even limited retaliation, but the threat of massive attacks against cities intended to cause as much destruction as possible as a deterrent in case its vital interests would be threatened. Tactial nuclear weapons were supposed to be used only as last warning before the holocaust.
However, though it’s the first time it has been stated publically, this new stance has been around for some time, buried in official documents, in convoluted language, but basically saying “we might use limited nuclear retaliation against rogue states or launch limited nuclear attacks against specific targets in these states”. Still, this is a departure from the traditionnal “all or nothing” french nuclear policy.