• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

France threatens to use nukes

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
M14 Shooter said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060119/wl_nm/nuclear_arms_france_dc_2

Imagine, on the day we find ObL offering a truce, GWB threatened to use nukes on any terrorist state that attacked us.
France rules out using nukes in a military conflict but is willing to respond with nukes in the event of a terrorist attack. Many terrorists are stateless and a nuclear response to terrorism could trigger a nuclear exchange which would threaten the survival of the human species. Terrorism, like I said before, is the greatest threat to the survival of mankind. Their are alot of terrorist organizations, like Al-queda, who are stateless and operate all around the globe. Using nuclear weapons wouldn't stop Al-queda from launching further terrorist attacks and Al-queda might actually try to provoke France into using nuclear weapons to enhance it's own position.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Heck, when you think about it, with France making such threats, other countries will take notice and say "gee, we need to get nuclear weapons too and put them on hair trigger alert to be sure we can strike back at France and assure our own security." Which has a domino effect where all nations will increase military spending and seek nuclear weapons to defend themselves from nuclear armed powers or the nuclear armed powers may seek to build more weapons or increase their own military spending, which puts the world in a very tense, dangerous situation.
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Read Chirac's comments and you will notice that he consistently referred to "state" sponsored terrorism. Since virtually all terrorism is currently "state-less", Chirac seems statement seems pretty self-serving - typically French.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
oldreliable67 said:
Read Chirac's comments and you will notice that he consistently referred to "state" sponsored terrorism. Since virtually all terrorism is currently "state-less", Chirac seems statement seems pretty self-serving - typically French.
Terrorism is carried out both by the state and independent organizations. It seems that Chirac's comments were aimed at those states who fund terrorist organizations. However, Al-Queda, is not exactly supported by any state and has alot of money and is all over the globe. I would be curious to see what Chirac would do if his nation was hit with a terrorist attack by Al-queda.
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
Terrorism is carried out both by the state and independent organizations
Notice that Chirac was quite careful to not put a fine point on it. He simply referred to "state" terrorism. I'm guessing (admittedly) that this was a bit of deliberate ambiguity. Bush, on the other hand, was quite clear: terrorist organizations and those states that support or sponsor them.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
France could lob nukes at state sponsors, but they aren't likely to hit any of the actual terrorists they want dead. They would likely destroy any chance of having allies within the state sponsored country.
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is the Gist of his statement....and it seems to me, he left quite a few options open.....likely meant as a vieled threat:

He appeared to imply that any large-scale, state-sponsored terrorist attack on France - whether or not it used weapons of mass destruction - would invite a closely targeted nuclear response from France.

"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," President Chirac said.

"This response could be a conventional one. It might also be of a different kind."

"Against a regional power, we should not have to choose between inaction and obliteration... the flexibility and reactivity of our strategic forces should allow us to respond directly against his power centres, against his capacity to act.

"All our nuclear forces have been reconfigured accordingly. To this end, the number of warheads has been reduced on some missiles on our submarines."
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The use of neutron bombs in remote areas where OBL might be hiding is viable. Tell the villagers to get out, take their sheep and goats with them, for a set time period. Monitor the evacuation closely, looking for AQ members. Then, when the area is supposedly clear, declare the area a free fire zone. Any mammals big enough to look like humans would get visited with relatively benign neutron bombs. They kill animals, and leave structures alone. You have to be very deep underground to be safe. Once the vermin have been eradicated, allow the villagers to go back home.
 

Mark O'Neill

New member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Bush, trying to save innocent lives instead of just doing the easy thing of dropping a crapload of bombs on them and saying they are 'casualties in the war against terror'?

That will happen on the same day that a certain barnyard animal learns the value of flight. (when pigs fly)
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Like I said before, governments are violent institutions. Nothing really to be proud of.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
France threatens nuclear response against terrorists.

"The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as those who would consider using, in one way or another, weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm and adapted response on our part," Mr Chirac said on Thursday in a speech at a nuclear submarine base in Brittany. He named no countries. "This response could be a conventional one," he said. "It could also be of a different kind."

Jaques Chirac

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/chirac-threatens-nuclear-response/2006/01/20/1137734151510.html

Talk about your French exceptionalism, imagine if Bush would have said this.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
[Moderator Mode]

Merged the France threatens to use nukes and France threatens nuclear response against terrorists. threads...same topic...

[Moderator Mode]
 
Top Bottom