Because honestly, why why not:
It's something to try to imagine what the Iranians are going to make of the remarks by the president of France. Monsieur Chirac confided this week to reporters of the New York Times, the Paris Herald, and Le Nouvel Observateur, that he doesn't think it would be much of a problem for the world if Iran had a pair of nuclear weapons. "Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous," he told reporters. He speculated that Iran would never use a nuclear weapon on Israel because "it would not have gone 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed."
(1) What do you expect from a country that says that Iran is a stabilizing force in the Middle East - at the height of Lebanon II, when Iran was supplying Hezbollah with weaponry actually being used to destabilize the Middle East in realtime. Like, as France was saying tha,t Iranian weapons were being used to destabilize the region. That's how stupid it is.
(2) They don't care about Tehran getting razed.
Rafsanjani:
If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world
Ahmadinejad and Khomeini:
As [Ahmadinejad's] mentor, Khomeini, put it in a speech in Qom in 1980: "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. … I say, let" Iran "burn … provided Islam emerges triumphant. …"
But Chirac thinks that it's OK for Iran to have one or two bombs, but no more than that. One wonders how he came up with and settled on two, given that Iran's regime refers to Israel as a two-bomb state.
Previously: Video: Iran Declares Their Intentions, Calls US An Affront To God, Video: BBC Explains Why Israel Has To Stop Iran, Democratic Leader "Pleased" Israel Has No Plans To Defend Itself From Iran
