Wake Up America has the story:
Addressing the French ambassadorial corps, Sarkozy stressed that such an outcome would be a disaster. He did not say that France would ever participate in military action against Iran or even tacitly support such an approach.
But the mere fact that he raised the specter of the use of force is quite likely to be perceived by Iran as a warning of the consequences of its actions.
Sarkozy praised the current diplomatic initiative by the major world powers, which threatens tougher United Nations-mandated sanctions if Iran does not stop enriching uranium for possible use in a nuclear weapon but holds out the possibility of incentives if Iran complies.
This two-pronged approach, Sarkozy said, "is the only one that can enable us to avoid being faced with a disastrous alternative: an Iranian bomb or the bombing of Iran."
Calling the Iranian nuclear crisis "the most serious weighing on the international order today," Sarkozy also reiterated his position that a nuclear-armed Iran would be "unacceptable" to France.
As I pointed out at the Standard last week, John Edwards also says that it's unacceptable for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons -- but it is not permissible for the US to threaten military action:
With a threat so serious, no U.S. president should take any option off the table -- diplomacy, sanctions, engagement, or even military force. When we say something is unacceptable, however, we must mean it, and that requires developing a strategy that delivers results, not just rhetoric. Instead of saber rattling about military action, we should employ an effective combination of carrots and sticks... We should continue to work with other great powers to offer Tehran economic incentives for good behavior. At the same time, we must use much more serious economic sanctions to deter Ahmadinejad's government when it refuses to cooperate.
The government of France is therefore officially to the right of a leading Democratic presidential contender on national security issues.
Does this say more about France, or John Edwards?
Note: The original Reuters piece is here.