Sarkozy Speaks

September 26, 2009 at 3:20 pm (By Rodjean)

From the UN remarks by the President of France:

“We say: reductions must be made. And President Obama has even said, “I dream of a world without [nuclear weapons].” Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite. Since 2005, Iran has violated five Security Council resolutions. Since 2005, Secretary-General, the international community has called on Iran to engage in dialogue. An offer of dialogue was made in 2005, an offer of dialogue was made in 2006, an offer of dialogue was made in 2007, an offer of dialogue was made in 2008, and another one was made in 2009. President Obama, I support the Americans’ outstretched hand. But what did the international community gain from these offers of dialogue? Nothing. More enriched uranium, more centrifuges, and on top of that, a statement by Iranian leaders proposing to wipe a UN member State off the map.”

In my opinion, wherever you are on the political spectrum, if you are serious about avoiding a nuclear exchange which destroys Israel and half the Middle East, Iran must be stopped. It is a priority higher than nation building in Iraq or Afghanistan. Any ideas?

Added:  If I’m going to suggest turning our military against another foreign power, I suppose I should at least identify myself  –  Rod


  1. Randy said,

    IMHO, it is far too late to stop it unless they are willing to stop it. Thanks to China and Russia, the Security Council will never come up with anything to force them to stop.

  2. wj said,

    The irony is that, if religiously-inspired fanatics end up using nuclear devices, it is at least a fair chance that they will be using them in (eastern) China or Russia (along the Caucasus). I can (sort of) see the inclination of those two to be obnoxious, for historical reasons and just because America is among those viewing with alarm. But really, talk about acting against your own obvious best interests!

  3. Randy said,

    Rod: Here’s a handy tip on how to identify a post as yours:

    1) Click on Edit on the top of this post
    2) Once the screen changes, look at the lower right for “Categories”
    3) Scroll down the “Categories” box until you see your name
    4) Check the little box next to your name
    5) Uncheck “uncategorized” (at the bottom of that list)
    6) Save & Return
    7) “by Rod” will now appear next to the title

    For future posts, just check “Rod” in the “Categories” box

  4. Rod said,

    Having lived through most of the Cold War, I have little faith in the U.N. Security Council. The parties that are concerned about an Iranian nuclear threat will have to act, and they will need to support each other to make it work. Israel has the most at stake. It has its own weapons of mass destruction, sufficient to threaten grievous injury to an attacker, but what good would that be if the crucible of the Jewish world was reduced to ashes – and it wouldn’t take many nuclear weapons to do it. For that reason, I believe there will be some sort of raid on Iranian nuclear facilities in the next few months.

    The French are alarmed and would support Israel. Germany and Britain might encourage Israel, overtly or covertly. Only the U.S. has the ability to support or stop it. What will Obama do?

    Unpleasant as it is, a nuclear North Korea is, to my mind, a little less of a problem. True, current North Korean leadership is probably crazier and more paranoid than the Iranians, but, what issue does it really have to threaten its neighbors about? A war with the South would be suicide. It is hard to imagine what North Korea with a handful of nukes could accomplish through the threat to use them. (Of course, there is the issue of North Korea sharing its technology.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: