Sarkozy: Missile threat comes from Iran
News Agencies
Published: 20.11.10, 15:41
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
17 Talkbacks for this article
1. So why did Obama take Iran off enemy list?
David Turner ,   Richmond, USA   (11.20.10)
According to today's Debka, in order to win Turkey's approval to host the missile defense shield he agreed to let Turkey command the base, and he agreed to Turkey's conditions that Iran and Syria not be included on the danger list. Since our president many times specifically named Iran as the principle reason for the missile shield, what might this mean? Bush destroyed the strategic ME balance by eliminating Iraq as deterrent to Iran. Turkey and the Arabs now need protection or accommodation. Absent US commitment to stop Iran, Turkey is making accommodation. And Obama, following the footsteps of his confused predecessor, is digging the hole deeper and assuring the US and the EU failure, and the loss of its strategic position in the region. Ironically the only fallback for the US to retain a foothold is Israel. And this administration is intent on burning its last remaining strategic bridge to that country as well. The US seems intent on failing as the world's only superpower. It seems intent also in, as the Titanic, dragging down all those allied with it. Israel better be considering its oprions!
2. 1-in 20 years time china will be the only superpower
the usa is in decline.
3. Napoleon Complex II
Matt   (11.20.10)
Sure thing Sarky, You want us to impoverish the next generation by giving billions to the multinational weapons dealers for what ?? To protect us from Nuclear Pakistan and its Taliban Warlords? To safeguard against X-Imperial Russia with its propensity for slaughter? To stall Nuclear China that coulnd't care less for International law? To Threaten the US , the only regime ever evil enough to actually use a nuke on the civilian populations? Or to protect the region against Nuclear Israels continual aggression against it's neighbours? Or even to protect Europe against France with its habit of handing over it's sovereignty and army to anyone who fires a pistol in the air? None of the above. You want us to pump millions into these death machines in order to protect us from Iran. A country with barely the capability to put up a fight against the array of war mongers who threaten its existence daily. How you people must yearn for the heyday of the Cold War when you could give away the state Coffers without anybody batting an eyelid....cos of the Reds under our Beds.
4. Sarko craves attention.
Persian CAT   (11.20.10)
His performance as the French president has been abysmal so he has to make ridiculous statements like this. He will be out of office soon, therefore the best thing is to ignore this little guy and let him let out his brainfarts and let him think he's somebody. Seriously, why would Iran attack its best oil and gas customers?! Does anyone know?
5. David Turner, you're living in the past...
Persian CAT   (11.20.10)
Israel's use as a "foothold" or the "stationary aircraft carrier" to ensure the US interests in the ME is so over, homie. As the general in charge of the US operations in ME said, Israeli policies endanger the US personnel and consequently work counter to the US interests. The "New Middle East" the Codi Rice and Rusmsfeld were talking about has its center of gravity shifted to the East of the Middle East, so to speak. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and as an extension of that, Syria and AfPak are the core of this huge energy, water, and market resources to pull the Western ailing economies out of the doldrums they have created for themselves. The US may not continue to be the "only" superpower but it is, and continue to be the engine for growth and prosperity for the foreseeable future. In that role the US cannot afford, and for the sake of the economic well being of its people, should reform or drop the sick "allies" whose policies work against its interests. There's no "Titanic" syndrome here, only rational and necessary restructuring of US policies. The Obama administration is "correcting" the policy trajectories of the US to ensure the US interests, not protecting the dogmatic and treacherous goals of some "allies".
6. NR 2.
Arn. ,   Sweden.   (11.20.10)
7. NR 4.
Arn- ,   Sweden.   (11.20.10)
IRAN CRAVES ATTENTION !!!. Seriously, why would Iran attack its best oil and gas customers?! Does anyone know? Persian CAT (11.20.10) SURE THING - THEY CAN BE REPLACED BY CHINA AND JAPAN. Arn.
8. Sarkozy
tom dee ,   bluffton sc USA   (11.20.10)
Sarkozy is an Israel spy and he would know the truth in this matter. The world will be a better place when the french keep him out of office.
9. #4 Iran at war with the West
Cynthia ,   USA   (11.20.10)
Ahmadinejad is not an economist. He's an Islamic fanatic and supremacist whose primary goal is to create chaos in the world to bring the 12th Imam or Mahdi out of the well at Jamkaran Mosque and make Islam the ruling faith. If the Iranian economy suffers, so be it. The economic and social well being of Iran and the Iranian people has never been a priority. Iran is a platform and the people are pawns for the Regime's regional and global conquest. As Western countries bail from oil and gas agreements, Iran pursues new business options like weapons smuggling, development of nuclear weapons and the drug trade.
10. HAHAH!!! Sarkozy is irrelevant!
IRAN#1   (11.20.10)
He can't even stop his wife from sleeping around!!!!!!
11. #10 But you don't disagree with him
Cynthia ,   USA   (11.20.10)
And you've noticed his wife is very beautiful. Sarkozy doesn't hide his wife under a black tablecloth. When we look at Mrs. Ahmadinejad, we see a burly figure, 70's spectacles and a protruding nose.
12. Persian CAT, not entirely right, nor wrong
David Turner ,   Richmond, USA   (11.21.10)
The shift east you speak of is correct... thanks to a US policy apparently fearful of further upsetting the strategic balance cause by Bush eliminating Iraqi deterrence to Iranian ambitions. Which is correctable had the US any sense of strategic priorities. Unfortunately as Bush was nearly all bully, Obama turned out to be all conciliator. And neither role is appropriate for a "super power." Bush a bully? Well, yes. and characteristic of a bully is the coward hidden inside. Bush sunk the US in another Viet Nam with even greater global consequences. He decided to cut his losses by dealing with Iran. The State Department "interest section" to Teheran in 2007 to buy off the Shi'ite militias and allow the US to withdraw with what little dignity remained, for example. His placing Gates, opposed to confronting Iran from the start as Secretary of Defense, the perfect choice, if he did NOT want to provoke the lion. Then appointing Mullen, another dove regarding Iran as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs settled the issue. The Saudis and Gulf emirates, Israel look to the US to fulfill its assurances of regional security, but only get "assurances," no action. The Iranians see the giant cowed and are only encouraged to challenge the gentle giant, embarrass the US, and defeat in all but military the world's only superpower. Now feared and respected. And the US, loss of face to accompany loss of courage, is also losing place. The superpower, the paper tiger with no awareness of its own strategic interests, is losing not only the ME, but its position in the world. How it can stand by and allow its major Muslim ally the Turks, the Arabs and Israel to face an enemy the US alone is responsible for creating; can watch the bricks and mortar fall into place for a nuclear arms race in the least stable region of the world, is hard to fathom. But there it is! So you are correct, Persian, its a new world, and not a safer one. But the real prize is still not Iran-Syria-Turkey-Hezbollah-Hamas but still Arab oil and the Suez Canal. But US or no, don't count Israel out. Unless Iran is seriously welcoming the 13th Imam, the messiah to arrive on the ashes of the Persian state, the Jewish state is generations ahead in technology and military skill. In the 1980's the relatively inconsequential military of Iraq beat the best and finest Iran had to offer in a war that cost the Islamic Republic one million souls over an eight year period.
13. what's turkey doing in there?
ray ,   israel   (11.21.10)
they've become an iranian proxy and will surely pass all info to iran
14. Turkey ask NATO not to name it...the burka on Europe
Anna M Sedda ,   Italy-Rome   (11.21.10)
Iran was not named at NATO meetings has the enemy of human life ;Turkey does not want Europe to give a name it to Iran problem and Europe did not.....EU is bending on Turkey-Islam violence and Iran in exchange of what? Oh yes ,not only women shold have a burka,also Iran shold have a veil to cover death-treaths.... Becouse a veil covers the murder.....
15. No burkas of any kind..Bravo Sarko..tell it the truth
Anna M Sedda ,   Italy-Rome   (11.21.10)
No burka in France for women,no burka on Iran terror treaths,no burka on Europe freedom of speech!!!Tell Turkey where he belongs...ASIA and not Europe!!Bravo Sarkos,say it and do not burk it!!!!!!!
16. David, we are only humans...
Persian CAT   (11.21.10)
No one can be entirely right nor wrong. Those of us who genuinely care about the security and stability issue all over the world have a responsibility to see the situations as they are today, not as they were. Maybe there are a few in Iran who want to see the "giant cowed" but there are more people in the position of responsibility who want the US to safeguard stability by taking into account the national interests of ALL regional players. No intelligent Iranian remotely considers "defeating" the US! Iran has no capability to do so. But by the same token, Iran does not want to be treated as a doormat either. The value of gunboat diplomacy by the US has vanished and the new world order needs the US to function as an arbitrator, honest broker, and the guarantor of economic and political stability. That's why I consider the talk about the twelfth, not the thirteenth, the US being the paper tiger, loss of courage, and so on as idle chatter and leave it at that. Regarding the "prize", I'm afraid you are not up-to-date on that account either. The future fuel source is no longer oil, it is natural gas. Lumping the Arabs of the Persian Gulf and Israel in relation to their outlook toward Iran is a big mistake. Iran has huge economic relations with the Emirates, and its relations with the Saudis is not as bad as some like to portray - as reported in the news, Ahamdinejad had several phone conversation with Abdollah of Arabia before his last trip to Lebanon. Israel's enmity towards Iran stems from the silly notion maintaining its hegemony and illusive military "superiority" that you and a few others are clinging to for no obvious reason. The Suez Canal is not even mentioned any more. The "Jewish state", by that I am guessing you mean Israel, is a figment of some people's imagination, because it is not recognized as such by any country. Surely Israel exists and recognized by many countries as it should be recognized by many in the ME including Iran. As far as military skills, attacking and killing defenseless population, but being beaten by those who can defend themselves, do not appear as "military skills" in my book. Maybe in yours. The fact is Iran has neither the will not the capability to attack Israel nor any other country.
17. Thank you for your reasoned response, CAT.
David Turner ,   Richmond, USA   (11.22.10)
Unfortunately I do not have the time this moment to give you the response I feel it deserves. I hope to do so later. But I fear this forum won't be available to continue the dialogue. Is there another way I can contact you?
Back to article