It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iran threatens to eliminate Israel (IF Israel attacks first)

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:08 AM

Iran threatens to eliminate Israel

Iran will eliminate Israel if it attacks the Islamic Republic, Iran's deputy army chief warned Tuesday in words conjuring up Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats to wipe Israel off the map.

"Should Israel take any action against Iran, we will eliminate Israel from the scene of the universe," Gen. Muhammad Reza Ashtiani said in Teheran on Tuesday.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:
Iran threatens to eliminate Israel
Israeli cabinet minister threatens to destroy Iran
Crossfire War - Israel Official Threatens to Destroy Iran if Iran Attacks Israel
Israeli minister threatens “destruction of the Iranian nation”

Related Discussion Threads:
Israel threatens Iran with destruction
Iran proposes missile shield against U.S., Israel
The Coming War With Iran
Israel may have to take military action against Iran: Bolton
Bush: US will 'confront' Iran if necessary
Bush: `Iran Is a Threat to World Peace'
US strike on Iran nearing

[edit on 4/16/2008 by biggie smalls]

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:08 AM
"Iran will eliminated Israel if it attacks Iran." That seems pretty fair.

They are not going to preemptively attack Israel, which cannot be said about Israel and its supporters (US among others).

Ashtiani's statement followed Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer's comment last week warning Iran that any attack on Israel would result in the "destruction of the Iranian nation."

Both sides of the table are creating fear. Both say we won't attack unless you do.

Will there be a false flag attack to force the other's hand? I'm pretty sure both peoples enjoy living and will do their best to avoid war. However, I'm not so sure those in power are satisfied with peace.

Ashtiani claimed Israel was "very vulnerable" and dismissed allegations that Iran was worried about Israeli maneuvers.

"Due to its special conditions, Israel is very vulnerable in the region," he said. "The aggressors will face a crushing response."

Israel is vulnerable in the region. It is surrounded by enemies. To dismiss that fact is to deny reality.

If Israel invades Iran, they're going to have some serious problems. First off there's a few countries in between, most of which are not on friendly terms with the Israelis. After the Israelis fight their way through Syria/Jordan, they'll have to make their way through Iraq, which just isn't going to happen.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev responded by saying "these hateful and extreme statements from the Iranian leadership are unfortunately routine. The sad reality is that these statements expose the mind set and political agenda of the leadership in Teheran. Unfortunately these hateful words are backed up by very dangerous actions."

Haha...Ditto my friend. Look in the mirror, you are as hateful and extreme as those you claim to be better than.

Its a two-way street.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Aryeh Mekel said that these comments illustrate the need for the international community to "work with more determination" and take steps to keep Iran, which is threatening to destroy another UN member state, from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Where is the threat? I have not read a threat anywhere in this article.

Are you implying the Iranians do not have a right to defend themselves from an attack, and saying so is a "threat"? What a joke. Go back to your stolen land, thanks.

Israel threatens Iran, Iran threatens Israel, rinse and repeat till Armageddon.
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 4/16/2008 by biggie smalls]

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:26 AM

Great find!

Not great news.

I also believe another False flag will happen to push this into reality.

It's not a matter of if but when.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:30 AM
Sounds fair to me. Worry about your own countries and stop attacking others. Treat others like you want to be treated. It is not that hard of a concept. If I was in a fight for a stupid reason I would hope the other person would beat the sense into me. I wish it was that way for this country too. We deserve it at this point.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:31 AM
They are in their right to state this..
There's nothing wrong here, I dare anyone to come here and chant this is evidence of Irans insane anti-israeli policy.

Truth is, Iran will not pre-emptivley attack anyone, it doesnt benefit them to do so.

They will defeat any nation that tries to battle them in a conventional war, the trump card is they know any nation whom dares use a 'non-convential' means of war will ultimately be defeated on the world stage for breaking the 'nuclear' taboo.
The only way Israel/US Can defeat Iran is with tactical nuclear weapons, & Massive airstrikes, this will lead to massive retaliation against Israel and Iran.

I prey neither are stupid enough to believe they can win.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:41 AM
Today the Earth seems like a giant game of Risk.

Is it just me, or is it not the media that are responsible for generating, formulating, editing, photoshopping, revising, sometimes hiding, and all together creating the scene that the viewers/readers react to?

Why do I have to know what the words of an army general in another countries says, when he isn't really saying anything that any general, in any army, in any country wouldn't say.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time to "shoot the messenger"... so to speak.

Good find my friend.


posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:45 AM
reply to post by biggie smalls

I don't think that an Israeli attack would constitute the movement of troops across the span of a few countries to invade/attack Iran. I think what they have in mind is a genocide of Iranians through a massive nuclear strike, it is within Israels capabilities, why waste manpower when tiny little atoms can do the job for you?

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by Agit8dChop

I beg to differ, If Israel and the US launched a joint attack against Iran there really is nothing Iran could do to stop them. The naval strenght and air strikes could do most of the work for us without even setting foot on Iranian soil, not to mention the outdated weapons the Iranians are using, we would not have to launch nukes, just bomb the hell out of them and return to our carriers to refuel and then head back again. I don't think the world has seen anything close to the air power we are capable of amassing if we really needed to.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:01 AM
The U.S and Israel may well have superior power, bombs, bazookas etc, but there's this little thing in Iraq right now called an 'insurgency'. Everyone said that Iraq's military would be easily overpowered - it was. It was done in a few weeks. But 5 years later, they're still fighting the insurgent element.

The human toll isn't good for Iraq either, 4 million displaced, 1 million killed.

The same would possibly happen in Iran. If Iran were attacked, it would probably inflame the whole Arab world. I don't think any good could happen for either side to talk about starting another war.

The formula for American foreign policy seems to be:

1. Regime change

2. ???

3. Profit!

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:13 AM
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation

Nice post. I agree, we should "shoot the messenger". Why would the media report this? Of course Iran would retaliate if Israel attacked first. What is newsworthy about that? This is only being reported to stir up more fear of the evil Iranians. Obviously only a bunch of barbarians, hell bent on destroying everything good in the world, would retaliate if attacked by another country. Savages!

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:16 AM
On paper, that is correct.

But your assuming Iran isnt preparing defenses the US doesnt know about it.

The Navy is vulnerable, more vulnerable than most believe.
Suicide boats, Sunburn missiles, mines... iran could sneak many of these in you know.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:22 AM
I think that a war with Iran would most likely be more challenging than anything the US has seen for a while. We would certainly lose more ships and planes. That being said, it still wouldn't be close. When you consider we have only suffered 4000 casualties in 5 years in Iraq, we weren't even remotely tested.

The US is prepared to suffer more losses than their enemies to win a battle, look at some of the battles in the Pacific during WWII. I don't think Iran would pose remotely that type of a threat though.

Our losses could be considered catastrophic when contrasted with Iraq, but I seriously doubt we would face anything close to WWII level losses. Plus, you know our administration is willing to sacrifice as many troops / ships / planes as necessary. Hell, the more we lose, the more money we get to buy new ones. It is a win win situation for the pencil pushers that make the decisions and don't have to face any of the risk.

Iran would most likely be a bigger challenge than Iraq, but ultimately they wouldn't be much of a challenge when facing the full power of our military.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:52 AM
How interesting, I seem to recall not long ago a similar post made about an report where Israel said the same thing, that if Iran attacks Israel, Israel would defend itself. Israel defend against Iranian attack threadYet the title of that thread didnt include the "If Iran attacks first)" clarification, and almost everyone made it out to be Israel threatening Iran. Here we see Iran saying the exact same thing, and everyone says its fair, reasonable, and that Israel is obviously a horrible regime planning to attack Iran. Now I agree that any country has the right to defend themselves, so I'm not here to take one side of the other, I just wanted to point out the blatent bias and refusal to accept anything other then how you see/want the world to be. Before people are so quick to accuse others of being blind, and bias, they really should reflect on their own selves. Only then will productive debate be achived, instead of mindless repeating and supporting of what one already believes.

"It is pointless to listen to someone who will not listen to you."
-Hiko Seijūrō

I hope this inspires thoughtful consideration not only in this thread, but in all threads here on ATS.

[edit on 16-4-2008 by demorior]

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:59 AM
reply to post by demorior

very interesting since the title of the other thread is actually

Israel threatens Iran with destruction

and not `israel defend against iranian attack` , bit obvious the bias you are showing.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 02:36 AM

Iran would most likely be a bigger challenge than Iraq, but ultimately they wouldn't be much of a challenge when facing the full power of our military.

Yes... but in the event of an attack upon Iran (an attack which would doubtlessly inflame the entire Arab and Muslim world), what makes you think it would be solely the Islamic Republic you'd have to deal with militarily?

Catch my drift?

Anyhow, taking into account the current Risk-like (as someone previously alluded to) geopolitical climate (and not to mention the mindset of a certain few world leaders who seem to have a penchant for eschatology and the like), I really don't believe it would be an exaggeration nor hyperbole to suggest that any such attack would trigger the mother of all battles. This is why we must avoid such unnecessary destruction, death and devastation at all costs.

Ah. Will humanity ever learn? Probably not in my lifetime, folks.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 02:53 AM
reply to post by Brad.T

Yes, I think you are correct. Why these leaders seem so hell bent on bringing about WWIII is beyond me.

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 03:08 AM

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by demorior

very interesting since the title of the other thread is actually

Israel threatens Iran with destruction

and not `israel defend against iranian attack` , bit obvious the bias you are showing.

From the other article:

An Israeli minister has threatened Iran with destroying the country if the Islamic Republic launches 'an attack on the regime'.

I would say that is saying the same thing. It is also the first line of the article. I think that demorior makes a very good point.

top topics


log in