France warns against Iran action

[Emillereid]

Simon Tisdall and Ewen MacAskill
Saturday October 18, 2003
The Guardian

The US pursuit of forcible regime change is not a viable or safe policy in the dangerous world that exists after September 11, the French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, said in an interview with the Guardian.

In a wide-ranging critique of US policy in the Middle East and beyond, Mr De Villepin said that any military action against Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons would be "absolutely ridiculous".

He also said that, in spite of Thursday's UN security council resolution giving the US-British force in Iraq a mandate, "the conditions for real progress on the reconstruction of Iraq are not complied with today".

"Reconstruction has to have a partner, you have to have real sovereignty in Iraq if you want to have the Iraqi people working with you." ....


http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1065802,00.html

Vive la France!

[NNN0LHI]

1. After reading this I am afraid that France has a new big brother

And his first name is Vladimir.

Don

[ConcernedCanuk]

3. , Britain, France and Germany have offered to supply civilian nuclear tech

. . , "Britain, France and Germany have offered to supply civilian nuclear technology to Iran

Now that's REALLY gotta piss off the USA !! ?

. . From the article:

"Of course, there are very difficult situations when human rights are concerned... we have known that in Kosovo. So in rare situations, we have to address these kinds of problems by military means. But you have to have the support of the international community... If there is one country that imagines it can solve this matter alone, we are going to see more vengeance, more difficulties, more problems, and the world is going to be more unstable."

Mr De Villepin's remarks underline the continuing differences between France, which led European opposition to the Iraq war, and Washington and London.

During a brief visit to London this week, Mr De Villepin had lunch with the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, and recorded the prestigious Dimbleby Lecture, which will be screened tomorrow on BBC1.

After his visit, it was announced that Mr De Villepin and Mr Straw and the German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, are to visit Tehran on Monday to try to defuse the nuclear arms row. To the annoyance of the Bush administration, Britain, France and Germany have offered to supply civilian nuclear technology to Iran in return for its abandoning any ambition to seek nuclear weapons capability."

Hmmmm - Do ya think the USA is getting "told" ? ?

[DeathvadeR]

16. o then they must be aiding terrorists??????

Sounds like a clear time to crack a can of prememptive Woop Ass to me.

[NNN0LHI]

18. And better make that industrial strength Woop Ass too n/t

[Hieronymus]

2. You know......

Rummy, Wolfowitz, and Perle are PISSED. Junior is too stupid to know or care.:bounce:

[FrenchieCat]

4. and it won't stop there....

Bush started some real shit.....That's why he's got to go!

[Nottingham]

5. Looking in my Crystal Ball Israel or US will Bomb Iran soon

And France can't do a damn thing about it

They are covering their A$$ :bounce:

[brainshrub]

17. Quick Robin....

...to the Pre-emptive strike mobile!!!

[cliss]

6. It sure looks that way.

Maybe DeVillepin knows something we don't. And of course, his comments are right on. How can you expect to govern a country, unless you have people supporting you?

But that presupposes the notion that we are really there on a "noble mission" of helping the Iraqis restore their country (with a few "tips" on the side).

What reason do we have to believe that? Take one look at Rums-felled; look at his glittering eyes, his ghoulish grin as he talks about killing people, and you'll know.

They are not interested in reconstruction. They know that if they succeed, people would be upset that the US is falling into disrepair.

[DivinBreuvage]

7. My guess: it's just talk

If the gang that's running this administration decides to go into Iran, the French will doubtless pee and moan about it, but they're not going to "put their foot down" and draw a line in the sand; certainly not if they'd have to do it alone. And while I'm not an expert on the former Soviet Union like world-renowned scholar Dr. Condoleeza Rice, I suspect that Putin's recent hint of saber-rattling is more of the same. My hunch is that this kind of talk is served up as sauce for the French or Russian home front and the outraged world community rather than as a serious shot across the bow to the noble admirals of our Ship of State.

I'm not sure whether the American Eagle will go shrieking with steeled talons into Iran. Certainly a sensible group of leaders, knowing what messes Afghanistan and Iraq have become and aware of the current strain on the economy and the military, would not do it. But the problem with ideologues and megalomaniacs, as the careers of Constantine, Napoleon, and Hitler show, is that it doesn't matter if their empire is a tottering wreck or if their enemy is genuinely harmless or too big a bite to chew off. They tear into it anyway because they simply cannot stop.

If the Eagle is unleashed, I think the strategy of the European nations will be to damn with fiery rhetoric while wrangling as many contracts and concessions as they can beneath the table. I don't think any of them believes the US can sustain its imperial pretensions for long; some like Putin are probably expecting to pick up the star-spangled gambler's chips after he's shot the piano player and run out the back door (I think I've stolen that from someone but I don't remember who), while nobler souls may believe they'll be able to set a better example at "winning hearts and minds" and enhance their nation's leadership on the world stage. I don't think either Europe or the UN will help the US at all, and they'll probably take advantage of any opportunity to force the US to humiliate itself with begging (as they've just done), but none of them will actively interfere or oppose the invasion.

Then again, some people believe that remarks Putin made a few weeks back imply that he might have been willing to actively support resistance to the American invasion of Afghanistan if Russia and the US had not come to an arrangement beforehand. So who can say? Maybe the big dawgs are just itchin' to have a scrap.

Françoise

[Dan]

8. I believe that

If Bush and this Administration takes the US into Iran, I think that the conditions for a Nuclear war will have been created.

I don't believe that Iran would start it, not having the necessary nuclear capability. But rather, I believe that Korea must act, because this Administration will have shown a lack of coherent policy or internal controls over its aggressive behavior. Plus, some people have to understand that a delivery system does not have to be a missle or plane, etc.. In a sad sort of way, it can a boat, anautomobile, or even something as simple as a good pair of tennis shoes.

I believe that if we attack Iran, then Korea must act because if we would attack Iran without just cause, after having created false justifications for a war with Iraq - then what else can they do, except wait to be next victim of the mad hatter in the White House.

It would be a logical response on their part. Unfortunately this senario plays into the Bush viewpoint that Bushie was selected by God to be our pResident at this time. I do believe that Bush would come in his pants at the thought of being the architect of the end times. He would probably feel vindicated at the rightness of such an event, or self fulfilling prophecy.

[0007]

14. I'll second that!

*

[cliss]

9. Awesome post, Freedom Frog

Welcome to the DU, and an awesome way to start!!!

:pals:

and Dan

[DivinBreuvage]

10. Thank You! :)

n/t

[goforit]

11. Thankyou France!!! Hats off to your peaceful efforts!!!

:bounce:

[neverforget]

12. Israel will strike it with some covert help from the US.

[DemVet]

15. Yep.

That's what I fear the most.

[Mechatanketra]

13. There's only one warning that will matter.

If you want the warning to mean anything, pledge now that you would provide military assistance to Iran if invaded, just as nations did to Kuwait when Iraq invaded that nation. (This is what should have happened with regards to Iraq as well, since the Anglophone Axis's actions were in clear violation of the UN Charter.)

Otherwise, don't bother. Bush is stupid in a lot of ways, but I think he can recognize a meaningless bluff when he sees one.