French President Jacques Chirac was interviewed by colleagues from the New York Times, the International Herald Tribune and Le Nouvel Observateur. The topic was the environment, which led to nuclear energy, which led to Iranian nukes,... and this Monsieur le Président, didn't want to have on the record. So he called the journalists back to retract and adapt his comments.
The discussion about Iran should be 'on the record' (The New York Times: Chirac Strays From Assailing a Nuclear Iran, Interview 1, Interview 2), so it will be clear for all to see how high the stakes are.
The French president is indeed a bit muddle-headed. Let's examine a few of his comments:
+ “if Iran had one or two nuclear weapons, it would not pose a big danger”. No it won't. But first of all, Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, Ayatollah Khomeini has declared that possession of nuclear weapons is against Islam. The Iranians still take him seriously. Secondly, the bottom line is, no country should possess nuclear weapons, they should all be destroyed, including those of France.
+ “the bomb will be of no use [to Iran]”. No, but if nuclear bombs are of no use, why does France still have them?
+ “what is very dangerous is proliferation”. Yes, and the reason why there is proliferation is because the existing nuclear powers refuse to dismantle their arsenals. If they dump their nukes, other countries will not be so tempted to also try to possess them.
+ Chirac says uranium enrichment is of no use to produce electric power. Yes it is, if you want to produce your own nuclear fuel not to be dependent on foreign countries which may not want to sell it to you. If you know how to enrich to 3% (for power generation), you also know how to enrich to 95% (to make a bomb). It just takes a bit longer...
+ If Iran drops the bomb on Israel, Tehran is going to get razed. That's indeed rather likely, so it was not necessary for the president to retract this comment. The point is, Iran is not going to drop a bomb on Israel. Ahmadinejad doesn't hate the Jews, he hates the Zionists. And there is no bomb which can spare the Jews and kill the Zionists.
+ While Chirac had the luxury to retract his comments or to clarify them, no such privilege was offered to Ahmadinejad. The Iranian president never said that Israel “should be wiped of the map”. That is the translation of the Ziocons. He said the Zionist regime would disappear, like the Soviet regime disappeared. But because Chirac still believes the translation of the Ziocons, he even refuses to talk to Ahmadinejad, who now also has a reason not to talk to Chirac, because he brought up the matter of “razing Tehran”.
+ Chirac believes that if Iran launches a nuclear tipped missile, “Tehran would be razed” before the missile got 200 meters in the atmosphere. It's scary that presidents of nuclear powers are so stupid to believe this. Sure, the U.S. and a few other countries can detect a ballistic missile launch. The problem is, you don't know what it's carrying until it's too late. A bag of confetti or a nuke? You don't know until it comes down. The Chinese launched a missile to destroy one of their satellites. The U.S. detected the launch, but didn't destroy it. You just can't start launching anti-missile missiles against every missile that is launched. And so it will be too late... A mushroom cloud razing one city will be followed by another mushroom cloud in retaliation.
And finally, Monsieur le Président, the U.S. and Israel are much more likely to use the bomb than Iran or North Korea. Better start thinking what you are going to “raze” in that case.
No comments:
Post a Comment