Our Oldest Enemy : A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France
I recommend this
Posted on 10/18/2005 8:31:15 PM PDT by F14 Pilot
TEHRAN - In a meeting with President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in Tehran on Tuesday, French Ambassador Bernard Poletti said his country is ready to cooperate with Iran in the production of nuclear electricity.
France is aware of Iran's concerns and its demand to access to nuclear technology for the production of nuclear electricity and is prepared to cooperate in this regard, he added.
The French ambassador to Tehran also presented a letter from Jacques Chirac to the Iranian president and expressed hope that he would be able to play a constructive role in the promotion of ties between the two countries during his mission to Iran.
Ahmadinejad said Iran's announcement that it is prepared to accept other countries as partners in its nuclear activities was the best and most important proposal for confidence building, transparency, and proving the peaceful nature of Iran?s nuclear program. However, the French governments position toward Iran?s nuclear program is a hurdle to the expansion of ties between the two states, the president observed, noting, Public opinion in Iran regards France as reasonable, free, and a supporter of justice, and due to this view, it was expected that the government of that country would be on the side of Iran in the nuclear issue.
Ahmadinejad stated that Iran does not seek nuclear arms and not only does not need such arms but also calls for total nuclear disarmament throughout the world.
Unfortunately, despite all the cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, through the adoption of some unjust positions, some countries are trying to impose their views on the Iranian nation.
It is absurd that certain countries that possess stockpiles of nuclear weapons are trying to undermine Irans civilian nuclear program, the president said, adding, No free and independent country in the world would accept such an imposition.
Our nation has been disturbed by the recent behavior of France, and it is expected that the government of France will take positive and constructive steps in order to remedy the damage to bilateral relations.
Consider the source...
What!? Paris Hilton is going nuclear!?
Oh, Paris, France. Never mind;)
Google news search turns up no corroborating stories from anywhere outside the MullahMedia...not even the NYT or WaPo!
dung.
Iran is worth trying to save. Nuke paree.
But of course! The French pu$$ies run true to form.
Need to send Paris Hilton to Iran in a short skirt to put the mullahs on their ear. 8^)
Imagine for a moment that this is true (there is a grain of truth to it).
What does it look like? France capitulates to Iranians.
What does it mean? It means France makes profits selling nuclear technology to Iran.
What does THAT mean? It means French technicians go into Iran to set up and operate nuclear plants, help with repairs, etc.
And what does that mean? The French government owns the nuclear power industry.
Connect the dots here, folks.
What it LOOKS LIKE, is France collaborating with Iran's nuclear ambitions. Generating? Much reaction and hostility in the Western press, notably the USA.
What it MEANS is that France is on the ground in Iran inside the Iranian nuclear power industry. The UN can't monitor anything.
Don't bet on French intelligence being incompetent.
That's a bet you'll lose.
Iran is going to get a nuclear power industry.
It can develop it by itself, with help from Pakistani nutjobs.
Or it can develop it with French help...and French monitoring...and the profits (and information) can flow West.
Therefore, scream away at how evil and horrible the French are. If Americans were loving this, the Third Worlders would be more cautious.
History lesson: back during the Cold War, France noisily retired from the unified NATO command structure.
The Soviets, of course, bent over backwards to try and make sure that the French didn't sign back up.
The practical effect of this was that, in Africa, wherever the French had troops and operated, the Soviets stayed out and focused elsewhere. To oppose the French would have meant driving the French back into the arms of America.
Net result: French troops in 35 countries in Africa, and putting French troops there practically took the country off the Cold War chessboard, because the Soviets focused elsewhere.
The Soviets, of course, were on to the game, and called the French "the Cubans of the West".
Net result: most of the core of the continent was out of the Soviet imperial game. Which was a net plus to the US and the cause of the West.
Iran is going to have nuclear reactors and a nuclear program. America isn't going to bomb it, because of Iraq. Israel can't bomb it. The Iranians are going to get this program. They want the bomb. They'll probably get it, too.
So, do you want an Iranian bomb and scientists you can't track? Or do you want it honeycombed with French operatives, so you can?
The latter: therefore, do your part and spew venom at the French. If the Americans LIKED the idea, the Iranians would start to distrust it.
Alternate Title:
Hooker Willing To Cooperate With Rapist
The Anbar Campaign - A Flash Presentation
Best enjoyed with speakers and broadband.,.....really outstanding!
Boy, I wish France or Russia would help US build nuclear plants for peaceful power.
Question- if we have 2,000 pound "bunker buster" bombs capable of puncturing the containment vessel of a nuke plant, and stealth aircraft to deliver them with-
why are Iran and North Korea still in the nuke business?
And wouldn't it be too bad if a "terrorist" (nudge nudge, wink, wink) bomb just "happened to go off as it was being assembled", say in the Bekka Valley of Syria? Yes, that would be tragic, wouldn't it? And the President can come on TV and say with a straight face that all of our stealth aircraft were accounted for at the time of the explosion.
Good point. The Tehran Times is hardly a valid source of information.
On the other hand, consider the story. The fact that this purported deal is so typically French does lend it some plausibility.
just Consider the source...
The problem with your argument that French "control" will be better than a purely Iranian or Iranian/Paki nuclear program is...not to go back to WW2.....just go back to the late 1970's up to 1981....Iraq, France and Osirak.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Osirak.html
Fat lot of help France (and Saddam's personal buddy Paris Mayor Jaques Chirac) were in "containing" Saddam Hussein's use of its nuclear program for WEAPONS production. Only an Israeli preemptive srike knocked cooperative French-Iraqi nuc weapons development off track. (and BTW, check out where Iraqi bought its "yellowcake" for its Osirak nuc weapons facility...Niger! French controlled uranium mines)
Of course, the French being such opponents of anti-semitism/sarc......that should be SO reassuring to the Israelis that the French would NEVER, for profit, assist Israel's enemies in developing nuclear WEAPONS.
Not.
Opposition to Israel is not anti-Semitism.
But that's a red herring anyway.
The point isn't that French presence (not "control") in a nation's nuclear power program PREVENTS that nation from developing weapons technology. It doesn't.
What it DOES do is give better human intelligence from in-country on what is going on in such a program.
And who do you think benefits from French HUMINT?
Are you still trying to convince me or yourself that France is an ally of the US and would share HUMINT with us about their nuclear assistance program in Iran? Like they did about their nuclear program in Iraq? HA! LOL!
Like they shared information with us in DESERT STORM about how to disable the KARI air defense network in Iraq? Or...helped the Iraqis harden and conceal their facilities and try to shoot our planes down?
Guess which.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.