Iran Threatens to Hit Israel and U.S. Bases

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards says his country will target U.S. bases in the Middle East and Israel if attacked-

www.israelnationalnews.com...



The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards on Sunday warned of retaliation against the Gulf's strategic Strait of Hormuz, U.S. bases in the Middle East and Israel if his country was to be attacked.

According to a report by AFP, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, speaking in a very rare news conference in Tehran, also said that he believed Iran would abandon the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty should it be targeted for military action.





Jafari said that the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel at the entrance of the Gulf through which a third of the world's traded oil passes, would be a legitimate target for Iran should it be attacked.

“This is a declared policy by Iran that if war occurs in the region and the Islamic republic is involved, it is natural that the Strait of Hormuz as well as the energy (market) will face difficulties,” he said, according to AFP



Not only would Iran target the Strait of Hormuz, but also US bases in the region-



Jafari suggested that U.S. military bases -- such as those in Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia -- would also be fair game for retaliation by Iranian missiles or proxy forces.

“The U.S. has many vulnerabilities around Iran, and its bases are within the range of the Guards' missiles. We have other capabilities as well, particularly when it comes to the support of Muslims for the Islamic republic,” he said.



He believes that the Iranian response alone will act as a deterrent to Israel acting alone-



However if Israeli jets or missiles did strike Iran, "nothing of Israel will be left, considering its size," he warned.

"I do not think any part of Israel will be untouched given our missile capabilities. Thus, our response is in itself a deterrent,” said Jafari.



I think it is interesting the head of Iran's Revolutionary guard believes Israel will not attack based on the dangers of retaliation.

This is why many believe a false flag is required to mobilise America into supporting military action, for Israel cannot go this alone.




posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


Well, duhhh... isnt that kinda obvious, if they're attacked they will go after the likely Govts. that attacked them...Makes sense to me...

And if Iran is attacked, Im sure they (US & Israel) would go balls to the walls with them so Iran couldnt retaliate...
edit on 16-9-2012 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
In my opinion, this is the "shot across the bow" of Israel and the US.

They know that they do not stand a chance against the combined forces of both nations, but will guarantee Israel will be destroyed and will take out some US assets before their complete downfall.

Given the current state of affairs in the ME, this is a smart move on their part. They are still taking a defensive posture by saying this will occur only "if they are attacked", but still letting everyone know that they are prepared to go down fighting and are willing to take Israel with them.

In essence, Israel and the US have no choice but to play the role of aggressor if they want to continue down the path of war with Iran.







edit on 16-9-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Same threats different week.


+1 more 
posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
still letting everyone know that they are prepared to go down fighting and are willing to take Israel with them.


If an American took that stance about a war say with China or Russia they'd be considered as being a brainwashed jingoist sheeple neocon....



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 

let me say thusly it is responding to threats !!!



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
I'm surprised anyone would think this wouldn't happen. Iran knows if war begins, it's all or nothing and if they can survive a month they'll likely survive the duration in some form. No one has made it that long with an intact military, yet. So hitting every U.S. Military base would be a no-brainer from their side, I'd think.

What are we going to do about it? Attack Iran? Kind of absurd by that point.


They're also right about Israel. This is almost assuming divine intervention because I don't know what else can see Israel surviving a full fight. Hezbollah is supposed to have 10's of thousands of rockets and honest to god missiles in Lebanon this time. Who knows what Gaza has hidden away for the 'big day' and that's what Israel's defense is good for. Iron Dome isn't THAT thick a dome......when Iran's deliveries start arriving in typical Soviet approach to war......pure horrible numbers. Sheer economy of scale.

Some nations put their fortunes into fancy planes and aircraft carriers. Iran put theirs into a couple very narrow areas......... Missiles and Mine laying/clearing operations with a mine-proof Navy to operate inside the mine fields while fully active. (The part people laughing at their Navy don't consider)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Wow...talk about a mis-leading title thread!!! Does the OP want a job w/ our present criminal government?


If Iran is threatened!!!

Come into my home..I'll attack yea too!



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


I think that the most important part in that conference, was the fact that Iran is - for the first time, I believe - talking about leaving the NPT agreement.

I also think that their statement about "not using nuclear weapons because our religious leader told us not to" is a bit...funny.

They defend them-selfs from nuclear accusations saying that the most important thing to them is their religion, and that those orders are sacred. However, suicide, violence and other nasty things are also immoral in their religion, and I don't see them avoiding those, when it suits them.

The best example of that are suicide bombers.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



Given the current state of affairs in the ME, this is a smart move on their part. They are still taking a defensive posture by saying this will occur only "if they are attacked", but still letting everyone know that they are prepared to go down fighting and are willing to take Israel with them.


The only problem with what you said is that Iran is the one responsible for being in this position.

If they had given full cooperation with the IAEA when they were told to - since, at least, 2003 -, then none of this would happen. Israel wouldn't even have reasons to make the accusations it does, and Iran would actually be protected by the cooperation they gave to IAEA, since the reports would be stating "Iran is clean" instead of "Iran doesn't fully cooperate with us and doesn't give access to certain nuclear sites and facilities"...



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 





The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards says his country will target U.S. bases in the Middle East and Israel if attacked-


Well, them being a sovereign nation and all, if attacked, they are well within their rights to defend themselves.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

yes of course. starting a war is a suicide for Israel. the public opinion is completely against Israel in the middle east. and technology is not that reliable ! for example Merkava tanks and Sar navies could do nothing in the 33 day war of Lebanon and the same is 22 day war of Gaza. I do not know how they dare speaking of a real war.
oh of course they whould be glad to sacrifice the US benefits for themselves. but I do not think that USA does such a big favor for them, does it !?



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
still letting everyone know that they are prepared to go down fighting and are willing to take Israel with them.


If an American took that stance about a war say with China or Russia they'd be considered as being a brainwashed jingoist sheeple neocon....



Not if done in a defensive manner as Iran did. His statements said specifically that this would happen "if his country was to be attacked".

Jingoism is based on an aggressive policy, which Iran does not have....but the US does.

So I think the comparison is not quite applicable.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy
 





I also think that their statement about "not using nuclear weapons because our religious leader told us not to" is a bit...funny.


Why is it a bit "funny?" People actually following the orders of their leader? You do know that is what the military is supposed to do right?



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


Well, duhhh... isnt that kinda obvious, if they're attacked they will go after the likely Govts. that attacked them...Makes sense to me...

And if Iran is attacked, Im sure they (US & Israel) would go balls to the walls with them so Iran couldnt retaliate...
edit on 16-9-2012 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)


Exactly.

This is just more of the same Israel/US hypocrisy. Them attacking groups of people they "suspect" of something or are "potentially" capable of something is totally okay, but another nation stating that it would defend itself if attacked is translated as a threat.

All nations have a plan to defend themselves, and all nations would attack strategic targets of their enemy. Why is it deemed unacceptable for Iran to state that it would attack strategic sites of an aggressor, but the US or Israel doing so is perfectly fine?

This is just another BS propaganda story, designed to fool idiots into believing that Iran is an imminent threat. If these plans constitute a threat then every developed nation with a defense plan is also a threat - especially the USA and Israel.

I wish people would use their brains when reading stories like this, instead of just accepting what they read and not bothering to actually read between the lines or even think about it.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


Damn dude.. I think that is the very first post ive read from you that I agree with.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



Given the current state of affairs in the ME, this is a smart move on their part. They are still taking a defensive posture by saying this will occur only "if they are attacked", but still letting everyone know that they are prepared to go down fighting and are willing to take Israel with them.


The only problem with what you said is that Iran is the one responsible for being in this position.

If they had given full cooperation with the IAEA when they were told to - since, at least, 2003 -, then none of this would happen. Israel wouldn't even have reasons to make the accusations it does, and Iran would actually be protected by the cooperation they gave to IAEA, since the reports would be stating "Iran is clean" instead of "Iran doesn't fully cooperate with us and doesn't give access to certain nuclear sites and facilities"...


Ya, go ask Saddam Hussein how cooperation with the IAEA worked out for him. They are a biased political organization and have been used by the UN and other nations to pressure "non-ally" nations, all while turning a blind eye to other nations that stockpile nuclear weapons without any oversight at all.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy
 





I also think that their statement about "not using nuclear weapons because our religious leader told us not to" is a bit...funny.


Why is it a bit "funny?" People actually following the orders of their leader? You do know that is what the military is supposed to do right?


If they follow orders based on their religious belief, then why don't they stop funding terrorist groups?

The only people that say that Iran isn't aggressive are the ones who are ignorant to their proxy war efforts. Just because Iran doesn't put an Iranian flag on the terrorists they fund, doesn't mean they aren't aggressive.

It's funny because it's a lie. A lie for people who are still naive and ignorant to what they have been doing for the last 3 decades.

If it's so wrong to develop nuclear weapons (to them), why did they have a declared nuclear weapons program until 2003?



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247

Ya, go ask Saddam Hussein how cooperation with the IAEA worked out for him. They are a biased political organization and have been used by the UN and other nations to pressure "non-ally" nations, all while turning a blind eye to other nations that stockpile nuclear weapons without any oversight at all.


If the IAEA is corrupt, and a tool for West and Israeli interests, why did Iran sign both IAEA and NPT?

Again, I see people talking about the IAEA being the devil, but I don't see anyone mentioning the help that the West provided TO Iran because they were members of the IAEA.

The IAEA is only a good buddy when it helps Iran, not when they ask them to fulfill their commitements. And people still talk about hypocrisy in the West.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy
 




The only people that say that Iran isn't aggressive are the ones who are ignorant to their proxy war efforts. Just because Iran doesn't put an Iranian flag on the terrorists they fund, doesn't mean they aren't aggressive.


And how many proxy wars has the US been involved in over the past 50 years? Man people are such hypocrites.





new topics
top topics
 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join