[verizon]

Have the socialists disowned him yet?

Makes Cheney look like a piker.

[boltondd]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
The answer, in my humble opinion, is Bernard Kouchner as FM. The man is a dedicated interventionist in the Tony Blair / Neocon mould.

For this man, Iraq is clearly not enough. Its cause he DOESNT want war. If Iran thinks it can divide the West, it may continue to pursue nuclear weapons, and war may come. If Iran thinks the West is serious, they are more likely to back down.

Vive la France!

[Quick$bux]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
The answer, in my humble opinion, is Bernard Kouchner as FM. The man is a dedicated interventionist in the Tony Blair / Neocon mould. He is hardly some kind of a classic warmonger, but yes he has a history in promoting humanitarian interventionism based on his personal experiences in Africa and elsewhere. The Iran thing however has nothing to do with that.

As for his point about allowing Iran to get nukes I agree with him it shouldn't happen.

[gennick]

Originally posted by Lancer
How do you disallow Iran from getting nukes? Ask really really nice? escalate sanctions to the point they really hurt.

Make the mullahs choose between Uranium enrichment and large scale unemployment, with its associated political risks.

[AbeldeldepBug]

An oil embargo!

[Roorseprate]

France

[iceleliewBync]

Originally posted by Shrapnel12


Ya, that worked in Iraq. . Iraq was a totalitarian state. Iran is an authoritarian state. You think Iran allows semi-free elections (albeit between mullah vetted candidates) which Iraq under Saddam did not do, cause the Mullahs have read Burke and Aristotle and believe in limited democracy? Nah, its cause theyre afraid if they dont allow enough room to vent, they will fall.

If unemployment raises significantly they will face some very serious dilemmas. That can be achieved with sanctions far lighter than those imposed on Iraq.

[Alkassyinhisk]

We thought the youth of Iran was going to rise up once before and it didn't happen. In fact, aren't they even more fanatical then their elders now? Also, I believe Iran is a democracy as much as I believe Egypt and Pakistan are.

BTW, in honor of France's new "hawkishness", I shall lay off the French jokes for a while. Gotta give credit where credit is due even where it's least expected.

[weightpillsnow]

Originally posted by Lancer
So is France stepping up to lead a coalition of sanction supporting states? What concrete steps have they taken? What exactly did they do to deserve their 'hawk' status? Nothing really. Kouchner said, War is the worst, and we should be prepared for the worst. Hardly the ringing call to battle some folks are making it out to be.

They ARE supporting tougher sanctions at the UNSC, but theyve been doing that for awhile. And they are now supporting the possibility of EU sanctions if Russia and China block UN sanctions.

[LClan439]

Originally posted by Shrapnel12
We thought the youth of Iran was going to rise up once before and it didn't happen. In fact, aren't they even more fanatical then their elders now? Also, I believe Iran is a democracy as much as I believe Egypt and Pakistan are. the number who will rise up purely over issues of democracy turns out to small enough the regime can successfully clamp down on them. Im not under the impression many are fanatics though. When the economic situation gets bad, they will do what people have done in so many places.

Thats why the Iranian regime spends so much time claiming the West is trying to deny them, not nuclear weapons, but nuclear energy. On that basis they can blame any sanctions on teh evil West preventing economic development. Thats why its essential we assert Irans right to nuclear power, but NOT uranium enrichment.

As for Pakistan, you might want to watch events there more closely.

I dont think either the govts of Pakistan or Egypt could survive a sustained campaigns either.

Note of course I never said Iran is a democracy, I said its authoritarian. In contrast to Iraq, which was totalitarian.

Where is Jean Kirkpatrick now that we need her?

[MannyLopez]

The EU can handle Iran, they don't need the US. They just need a set of balls and maybe now they've got one. Lets see if the population has the will for it.

[teodaschwartia]

...and with France leading the way and the US sitting on the sidelines being critical, yes.

[rozneesitcn]

Actually I think we, the 'West', united, should tell the Iranians that they have one week to open up their nuke program for us to remove, dismantle all terrorist groups on their territory, detain the terrorists and hand them over, stop dissing the US in the media and from the pulpit and make a blanket statement disavowing the jihad or face carpet bombing of their cities, starting with Tehran, to commence in one weeks time. Then, drop leaflets on Tehran telling everyone they have one week to get out of town.

Put it on them to decide if they should have cities or not. One after another, warn them, give the people a week, then destroy the city. Conventional dumb bombs.

That ought to do it.

The terrorists give the folks in the WTC a week?

[dmitrynts]

Originally posted by Lancer
The terrorists give the folks in the WTC a week? What's the prescription for Saudi-Arabia then?

[bromgeksan]

The government is supposedly our buds, the citizens fly planes into our buildings.

[Rememavotscam]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Cort Haus



http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...ImXHiG4vnRc-lQ

Kouchner warned, "We have to prepare for the worst, and the worst is war."

Kouchner is surely saying "prepare for war".

"Prepare for the worst", at least in American English, has a different connotation than "prepare to do X" It implies getting ready for something one is trying to avoid, while the latter means one has decided to do it. Im not certain of the connotations in French.

However, like Blair, it will not be he and his country that will lead the way, but the USA. Ultimately, policy responsibility lies with Washington. Like Blair, he seeks the glow of a sense of mission and purpose as he struts the world stage,

I dont believe Blair sought a glow - I beleive he genuinely believed in his policies. I see no evidence M Kouchner is seeking a "glow" The problem of Iran and its uranium enrichment program is a real one, and that was recognized by the previous French Govt as well.


knowing full well that it won't be his country that will be doing the heavy lifting.

In the case of Blair and Iraq, britain certainly did quite a bit of heavy lifting. Who lifts what wrt Iran will depend on what strategy is pursued. At this point what is being pursued is a new UNSC resolution, and EU sanctions.


Hopefully M Kouchners statement will remind all, especially Mr Putin and whomever he is in the process of annointing as his succesor, wha the potential consequences are in sanctions are NOT pursued.

[Impariclainna]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


What's the prescription for Saudi-Arabia then? When pray tell did the Govt of Saudi Arabia attack the United States?

I dislike the govt of Saudi Arabia, and have done so since before you were born unless you are older than I think you are. But treating the govt of Saudi Arabia as the perpetrator of 9/11, as you seem to, because its citizens were involved, and some of its elite supported Saudi Arabia is an offense against the truth.

[CreativeAcrobate]

While we're talking of Iran, China and Russia are headed towards a cold war that rivals Russia's with the USA. If it ends at that, good.

Russia needs to import Chinese. China has too many people and Russia not enough.
40 acres and a mule to move to Russia.

[ViaxobbimeVar]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
How would you get the Chinese or the Russians who are underwritting the Iranian program on board with real sanctions? A. A mix of carrots and sticks
B. Reminder that the absence of real sanctions could lead to war, which nobody wants
C. If they dont get on board, and the UNSC fails, we proceed to real sanctions with our democratic partners. EU sanctions are a major issue now.

[wallyfindme]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by lord of the mark
Originally posted by Cort Haus



http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...ImXHiG4vnRc-lQ

Kouchner warned, "We have to prepare for the worst, and the worst is war."

Kouchner is surely saying "prepare for war".

"Prepare for the worst", at least in American English, has a different connotation than "prepare to do X" It implies getting ready for something one is trying to avoid, while the latter means one has decided to do it. Im not certain of the connotations in French.
I do not belong (yet) to the Académie, but I can confirm your interpretation, only adding a faint difference: replace “trying” (a simple attempt) by “strongly desiring and doing one’s best”; “worse” implies a powerful will and reaction.