April 12, 1918 - Air raid in Paris

Don Martin diary entry for Friday, April 12, 1918:

Air raid in Paris. 9 killed – 60 injured.

Spent the day in Paris. Saw [Henri] Bazin [Philadelphia Public Ledger] at office of [Naboth] Hedin, Brooklyn Eagle correspondent. Both Bazin and Hedin have decided not to go with 1^st division. Had dinner at Prunier’s with [Burn] Price and afterward went to the office. Then to the Crillon. Just as I had made myself comfortable in my room and was reading letter from Dorothy, heard cannonading. Lights then went out and I knew another air raid was on. Dressed hurriedly by candlelight and went down in the lobby for an hour and a half. Bomb hit gas main about a mile from the hotel on Rue [de] Rivoli and caused big fire which we could see from in front of the hotel. [The air raid caused 26 dead and 77 wounded.]

German drive now directed at the British and looks quite serious.

Weather rainy

Rue de Rivoli after air raid on April 12, 1918 (Agence Rol)

Comments

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary. Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’ Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’. Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.? To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension. For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...

‘Making nuclear fuel’ under the NPT

It is with some hesitation that I take issue with the latest publication of the renowned Henry Sokolski and Sharon Squassoni on August 15 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, titled: “ Actually, the NPT doesn’t guarantee a right to make nuclear fuel .” But someone should defend the IAEA and international safeguards! Here are points in question. ‘ The [NPT] treaty was designed to prevent dangerous bombmaking activitie s.’ NPT is far more complex than that. It is common to state the three pillars of NPT: nuclear disarmament; nuclear nonproliferation; and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Nonproliferation involves the commitment of non-nuclear states not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept IAEA inspection to confirm that commitment is being followed. Perhaps Sokolsky intends to refer to INFCIRC/153, which lays out how IAEA and the state cooperate to carry out that confirmation. If so, INFCIRC/153 is not designed to ‘prevent’...

Search This Blog