However; could this have played out any differently? Possible (right...) alternative outcomes:
Miracle outcome #1: The crew rejects at some 190 kts and roll onto the grass doing at least 100 kts. Miraculously they aircraft does not collide with any obstacle and stops more or less intact on the grass. A few people make it out despite the fire. For the rest of aviation history this event is held up as yet another example of a needless crash caused by the captain's flawed decision to reject above V1, since "everybody knows" that the aircraft could have flown away and landed safely had the takeoff not been rejected.
Miracle outcome #2: The crew makes a snap decision to land on Le Bourget, somehow manage to line up with the runway and land somewhere close to the threshold, brakes are able to slow it down despite being massively above max landing weight, and the aircraft stops without hitting any obstacles (the last point is incredible given the surroundings at Le Bourget). A few people make it out despite the fire.
Miracle outcome #3: By some kind of magic both the flight controls, systems, structure and engine 1 survive the onslaught of the fire for another 45 seconds or so; I have no idea how that could be possible but let us assume it is. By that time the fuel in the breached tank would be depleted. The fire did not damage any other tanks (big assumption here), so the fire actually stops at this time. The crew manage to nurse the damaged aircraft, left elevons all but burned off and unknown other systems malfunctions, to a safe landing. Everyone lives happily ever after.
Would any of those three miracles have been possible? To my mind #2 and #3 are pure fairy tales, and the chance of someone surviving miracle #1 seems remote. Possible, maybe; likely, not a chance.
Yet those who argue that this accident had anything whatsoever to do with the crew's actions are placing their bets on the crew managing to achieve one of the three miracles above. I am not buying it.