Iran scorns French warning of war

[COLOR="Arial Black"]'Inflammatory' [/COLOR]

Mr Kouchner said negotiations with Iran should continue "right to the end", but that an Iranian nuclear weapon would pose "a real danger for the whole world".

He said a number of large French companies had been asked not to tender for business in Iran.

Iranian official media responded with contempt.

"The occupants of the Elysee (the French presidential palace) have become the executors of the will of the White House and have adopted a tone that is even harder, even more inflammatory and more illogical than that of Washington," it said.

The accepted wisdom in Iran is that the US is too wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan to launch another war in the region, says the BBC's Jon Leyne in the capital, Tehran.

Mr Kouchner was visiting Russia on Monday, where he was expected to push for tighter UN sanctions to try to force Iran to give up enrichment.

Russia has a UN Security Council veto over any new sanctions, and its support is seen as vital for any new approach.

But Mr Kouchner said even in the absence of UN action, the European Union should prepare its own sanctions against Iran.

Tougher approach

Iran has warned that any new punishments could push it to stop co-operating with the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
BBC NEWS | Europe | Iran scorns French warning of war

So when did they even start to cooperate with the IAEA?

Nice to see the French finally on board though....:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

Howdy Psycho4Bud,

It is good to see the French finally comin onboard and helping us to rein in the rogue regime of Iran. :thumbsup:

Thanx for this heads-up ! :)

Have a good one ! :jointsmile:

the french grew sum balls

So you think they're gonna attack iran for us? I find that more than a little unlikely.

Oh noes teh French r coming!!

Bewarez Iran!

Really don't like the new lil Bush they have over there, so now what, all of a sudden the French are gonna support this guy and his tougher stance on terror even though for the past several years since the invasion we've gotten nothing but a could shoulder and a back turned from France?

When and how did things change? Do the French people really support this new stance and new relations with Washington? I mean I know there were riots over there so there must be some division over the new policies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Jack Sparrow

When and how did things change? Do the French people really support this new stance and new relations with Washington? I mean I know there were riots over there so there must be some division over the new policies.

---

LOL....it was just like the dems here in the states when they don't win an election. Since then though I haven't seen anything resembling the crap that was happening with Chirac.

Have a good one!:s4:

LOL....it was just like the dems here in the states when they don't win an election. Since then though I haven't seen anything resembling the crap that was happening with Chirac.

I didn't like Chirac either, he was just an anti-American prick and a smug asshole to boot.

I like having new relations with France once again, although I don't agree with Iraq and all the fearmongering from the war on terror. But I still don't get how all of a sudden France has completely pulled a 180 from not caring to now making threats of war against Iran. Definitely not a side of France we're used to seeing here.

I'm just curious as to how the people over there really feel. I guess since they elected the guy the French are taking the terror threat more seriously now?

Actually this started with Chirac. When the U.N. threatened Iran on sanctions they responded that they would shut off the oil lines leading to Europe. Since Iran is a major supplier to France, Chirac added "economic" terrorism to the law that gives them the right to launch their nukes.

In a major defence policy speech, Chirac said: â??The nuclear deterrent is not intended to deter fanatical terrorists. But the leaders of states who use terrorist methods against us, as well as those who consider using in one way or another weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would expose themselves to a firm and appropriate response on our part. This response could be a conventional one. It might also be of a different kind.â?�

Among those interests to be protected the president included â??the guarantee of our strategic supplies and the defence of allied countries.â?� In this respect the president is obliged to estimate whether â??the extent and the possible consequences of a threat or an intolerable extortion fall ... into the field of our vital interestsâ?�.
French president Chirac threatens nuclear retaliation in the event of terrorist attacks

Have a good one!:s4:

the french? please. they can't do shit really on their own. after world war II, europe was screwed militarily. america and russia were the shit as they were the "survivors".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Actually this started with Chirac. When the U.N. threatened Iran on sanctions they responded that they would shut off the oil lines leading to Europe. Since Iran is a major supplier to France, Chirac added "economic" terrorism to the law that gives them the right to launch their nukes.

Have a good one!:s4:

---

Of course the only sanction that would really matter would to be to stop buying their oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anubis10012007

the french? please. they can't do shit really on their own. after world war II, europe was screwed militarily. america and russia were the shit as they were the "survivors".

---

They are the ONLY NATO country that has absolute control of their own nukes. The others have to have a launch passed though NATO.

Have a good one!:s4: