Chirac threatens nuke terror for terrorism

by Eoinhttp://www.indymedia.ie/publishcomments.php?story Dubsky Wed Jan 25, 2006 09:42

Please consider writing a letter to the French ambassador to Ireland and the Irish Dept of Foreign Affairs to complain about Chirac's recent nuclear terror threats. You could also write the the Dpt of Enterprise, Trade and Employment regarding HP's HPTC unit in Galway, which is where the supercomputer for testing and developing new nukes comes from. Send a copy of your letter to your local paper too.

Below is a basic letter example.



TO: ambassadeur @ ambafrance . ie

SUBJECT: Objection to French Nuclear Terror Threat

His Excellency Frédéric Grasset
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of France to Ireland

Dear Ambassador Grasset,

I write to express my deep concern at the recent statement on French nuclear weapons by President Jacques Chirac.

The new doctrine is a disturbing departure from France's recent progress in nuclear disarmament.

How can the French Republic now meet it's Non-Proliferation Treaty Article VI obligations to make "good faith" efforts toward nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament? Or for that matter, how can the President of the French Republic lecture aspiring nuclear states about their "treaty obligations" (L’Ile Longue, Brest, 19/01/06)?

By threatening a nuclear weapons attack against non-nuclear states, and in defence of "strategic supplies" and other things, the President of the French Republic has surely confirmed the criminality of France's nuclear weapons system. The International Court of Justice opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons clarified authoritatively in 1996 that there is no room in International Law for such nuclear terror.

I would appreciate if you could relay my concerns to the president's office, and would reply to my email at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

by Righteous Pragmatist Wed Jan 25, 2006 13:45

If Iran destroyed Paris with nuclear tipped missile or with a terrorist attack using a nuclear weapon then the French would be perfectly entitled to attack ITeheran with nuclear weapons.

But what Chirac and co must realise is that you do not have to wait for Iran to acquire these weapons - a more sensible strategy than nuclear deterant is to attack with conventional forces before Iran obtains a nuclear capability.

by iosaf Wed Jan 25, 2006 14:24

a variety of links for francophones ranging from the bolshevik "Humanité" to the kathurlick dominated X-ian "Le Journal Chrétien". What is interesting is that both poles of opinion suggest international opinion is polarised. And Russia has just offered Iran the possibility of testing its nuclear material on Russian territory under Russian supervision in such a way that it would only be able to answer its "power needs" and not make bombs. I must admit that lead-up and posturing of the G8 crew to the Russian G8 "energy security" 2006 gig is quite interesting. When the New World Order crew talk about what is really close to their heart they come across slightly more credibly than when they keep us all happy by talking Geldof style.

http://www.humanite.presse.fr/journal/2006-01-20/2006-01-20-822311
http://www.spcm.org/Journal/article.php3?id_article=368
In this article the Xians point out that the opposition in Germany are united in criticism of Chirac's speech, without pointing out that the opposition to the "grand Coalition" is a bit ridiculous now. Germany stopped being a democracy in 2005 - remember?
http://www.spcm.org/Journal/article.php3?id_article=345
Of course we don't really know who the "terror states" are, do we? Its a bit too old fashioned to suggest that rather than the umbrella group of fanatics sold to us as the source of evil, we now go back to thinking a state is actually behind the planning of a nuclear attack.
http://www.solidariteetprogres.org/spip/sp_article.php3?id_article=2066
and the bella ciao collective think Chirac is just being an imperialist (as always) and really just trying to "lead" europe again by outdoing the yankees on sabre rattling rhetoric. & Of course -he is-. He's going to see Putin and talk energy security soon. Last year we were awash in sincere and long awaited rhetoric on poverty. We made it historic - remember? Doesn't exist now. This year it's "nuke 'em! we need our oil / gas" rhetoric. = Get used to it. Mc Dowell wil send out garda recruits to guard the Dublin bay refinery before his 200 last days of ministry are up. & for good reasons, one of the major flaws in the Pentagon's invasion of Iraq plans, was the lack of foresight or planning they had put into "securing energy supplies" globally before hand. Chavez did as much to delay the start of war with his control of gas as we did with our protests. They need to sort it out, or else they can't go on beating people (and states) up. & then they wouldn't be in charge anymore. & we wouldn't have teeth whitening or second homes or rewriteable (under license) DVD's with which to enjoy our hollywood movies again and again. In short, we'd lose our civilisation.

http://bellaciao.org/fr/article.php3?id_article=22593

If you don't oppose Iranian nuclear ambition on ecological grounds alone, - you are a liar.

by Eoin Dubsky Wed Jan 25, 2006 17:28

RP, the article above concerns France's NEW policy of targeting NON-nuclear states for alleged acts of (non-nuclear) terrorism. If you missed that, then you probably also missed the fact that Iran is in a rush to arm itself with the bomb to avoide being invaded as Iraq was (the US-UK threat), and to create a balance of terror in the region visavie Israel's nukes (the regional threat).

The Korea Times reported earlier this month that part of a North Korean missile (it was a test, no nukes aboard) was recovered in Alaska by US authorities. ( http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200303/kt2003030417272311970.htm ) That would make NK the only state in history to fire anything at the Continental United States and get away with it.

The lesson from Washington of this century so far has been this: if you don't fit into our global system, and you don't have the bomb, we'll kill ya.

I'd be interested to know what the response has been from Ireland.

by Righteous Pragmatist Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:44

"if you don't fit into our global system, and you don't have the bomb, we'll kill ya."

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! (Rolls on floor in spasms of belly laughs)

Give me a break!

by mir Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:48

President Vladimir Putin boasted Tuesday that Russia has new missiles capable of penetrating any missile defense system and said he had briefed French President Jacques Chirac on their capabilities.

"Russia has tested missile systems that no one in the world has," Putin said. "These missile systems don't represent a response to a missile defense system, but it doesn't matter to them whether that exists or not. They are hypersonic and capable of changing their flight path."

http://www.kyivpost.com/bn/23788/
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=3...21407

by Eoin Dubsky Wed Feb 08, 2006 00:58

Russian nuke development has always been in reaction to US nuke provocation. The Bush II government are continueing that tradition/trajectory towards global destruction, picking up from where the Clinton administration left off.