if Israel attacked Iran, Tehran would "level Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground."

hamidreza

Active member
if Israel attacked Iran, Tehran would "level Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground."

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran is not opposed to direct talks with the U.S. to resolve its nuclear standoff with the West, the country's top leader said Thursday in comments that appeared to soften its long-held policy of outright rejection of bilateral talks with Washington.
But Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he's not optimistic that such talks would yield results unless Washington stops imposing sanctions against the Islamic Republic. His remarks came as President Barack Obama visits Iran's archrival, Israel, which has repeatedly threatened to take military action should Iran appear to be on the verge of obtaining a bomb.
Addressing a crowd in northeastern Iran on the first day of the new Persian calendar year, Khamenei also had a strong warning for Israel.
"Sometimes, leaders of the Zionist regime threaten us. They threaten to take military action. They are not in the size to be put in the list of Iranian nation's enemies," Khamenei said in comments broadcast live on state TV.
In a strong warning to Israel, Khamenei said that if Israel attacked Iran, Tehran would "level Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground."
The U.S. and its allies fear that Iran will ultimately be able to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is geared towards generating electricity and producing radioisotopes to treat cancer patients.
Khamenei claimed the U.S. wants to impose its will on Tehran.
"The Americans constantly send messages to us through various ways, saying let's hold (bilateral) talks on the nuclear issue," Khamenei said. "I'm not optimistic on these talks. Why? Because our previous experiences show that dialogue, in the logic of American gentlemen ... means let's sit down and talk so that you (Iran) accept our views. This is not dialogue. This is imposition and we won't give in to it."
Iran is living under stepped-up Western sanctions that include a total oil embargo and banking restrictions that make it increasingly difficult for Iran's Asian customers to pay for oil deliveries. Iran's income from oil and gas exports has dropped by about 50 percent as a result of sanctions.
Khamenei said the U.S. has sent messages to Tehran, sometimes in writing, saying it is willing to hold bilateral talks with Tehran separately from the negotiations Iran is holding with five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany.
"I'm not optimistic about these talks, but I'm not opposed to it either," he said.
However, Khamenei said the best way to resolve the standoff would be for the West to recognize Iran's right to enrich uranium and agree to a monitoring process to ensure that it won't be used for weapons.
"Iran only wants that the world recognize its enrichment right which is its natural right," he said.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters in Iran, said there is no reason why Tehran should trust the U.S. when Washington doesn't trust Tehran.

"We have repeatedly told you that we are not after nuclear weapons. You say you don't believe us. Why should we believe you? When you are not ready to accept an honest and logical remark, why should we accept your words that have been disproved many times?" he asked.
Khamenei alleged that the U.S. wants the nuclear issue to remain unresolved so it will continue to have basis for the sanctions, which he said have harmed, but not crippled the Iranian economy.
"Yes, sanctions have had an effect. If they (U.S.) want to be happy, let them be," he said.
"Our economy suffers from the problem of being dependent on oil," he said. "We have to distance our economy (from oil dependence)."
In Jerusalem on Wednesday, Obama said he continues to prefer a diplomatic solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran and thinks there is time to achieve one. Whether that works, he said, will depend on whether Iran's leaders "seize that opportunity."
Although Obama did not promise that the United States would act militarily against Iran if Israel decided that must be done, he offered an explicit endorsement for Israel to take whatever unilateral measures it deems necessary to guard against the threat.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said both he and Obama agree that it would take Iran about a year to manufacture a nuclear weapon.


http://news.yahoo.com/iran-says-not-opposed-direct-talks-us-144829035.html
 
I think comments like this
"The Americans constantly send messages to us through various ways, saying let's hold (bilateral) talks on the nuclear issue," Khamenei said. "I'm not optimistic on these talks. Why? Because our previous experiences show that dialogue, in the logic of American gentlemen ... means let's sit down and talk so that you (Iran) accept our views. This is not dialogue. This is imposition and we won't give in to it."


Show that he has an understanding of the games being played, it is all about influence so I am all for him on that count but comments like this:

In a strong warning to Israel, Khamenei said that if Israel attacked Iran, Tehran would "level Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground."


Are just stupid, now you have given your opposition the sound bite they want "Iran plans to level Tel Aviv and Haifa" it may not be what he said but it is how it will be seen and sold to a public that is mostly incapable of doing anything more than following an ideological line.


 
I think comments like this




Are just stupid, now you have given your opposition the sound bite they want "Iran plans to level Tel Aviv and Haifa" it may not be what he said but it is how it will be seen and sold to a public that is mostly incapable of doing anything more than following an ideological line.


The message is exactly what you read in english. I think the people who should get it mean are Israel and her supporter the US, and they have got it.
 
The message is exactly what you read in english. I think the people who should get it mean are Israel and her supporter the US, and they have got it.


If I were Iran, first thing I would do is at every corner expose the game. And do it in a way sublime enough so that when Western media reports it they unknowingly report the situation as is to their viewers.

Most people will follow ideological lines branded into their brains daily since birth, even westerners who watch " World News in 60 Seconds".

If I were Iran I would also avoid providing the instant attack card of justifcation. As soon as Iran with bold comments of leveling Tel Aviv reach the western masses, it will be over portrayed and broadcast on a loop to eventually ram that "justification" into the public's common opinion.

Thus giving a military strike the go ahead becomes much easier.

Iran if they wish to continue existing as they do, should pull the curtain back on the dirty deeds happening in bed between Washington D.C., Tehran and Tel Aviv. Not making military threats.

Military capability is something in my opinion that should not be flaunted, capable yes, but not boasted or relied upon.

Lastly it would be quite comical for somebody to pull the skirt out from the U.S. foreign policy's waist and we all finally admit it is what it is without a single casualty or one shot being fired.:p
 
If I were Iran, first thing I would do is at every corner expose the game. And do it in a way sublime enough so that when Western media reports it they unknowingly report the situation as is to their viewers.

Most people will follow ideological lines branded into their brains daily since birth, even westerners who watch " World News in 60 Seconds".

If I were Iran I would also avoid providing the instant attack card of justifcation. As soon as Iran with bold comments of leveling Tel Aviv reach the western masses, it will be over portrayed and broadcast on a loop to eventually ram that "justification" into the public's common opinion.

Thus giving a military strike the go ahead becomes much easier.

Iran if they wish to continue existing as they do, should pull the curtain back on the dirty deeds happening in bed between Washington D.C., Tehran and Tel Aviv. Not making military threats.

Military capability is something in my opinion that should not be flaunted, capable yes, but not boasted or relied upon.

Lastly it would be quite comical for somebody to pull the skirt out from the U.S. foreign policy's waist and we all finally admit it is what it is without a single casualty or one shot being fired.:p

Exactly Iran's major card in this battle is its "underdog" status and it should be using it to great effect, it is pointless trying to rattle a big stick at the US as it is a battle it can't win but Iran can win the "hearts and minds" war so they are better off refraining from threats and just pointing out the game being played.
 
Oil and banks sanctions were the last cards west played and now they can't do anything more. They hoped that they would have something like Arab spring or protests like some bankrupt European states but nothing happened in Iran. Now they should repeat their empty threats again and again as they did in recent years. We are not used to reply their threats every day. We warn them one time on the first day of the new Persian calendar year and they should hang it on their ears for the whole year.
But about the sanction although our currency lost 70% of its worth and makes a lot of problem for our economy, I don't see it as a threat but an opportunity. For many years we always said for how many years our economy should dependent on oil incomes? How other countries are living without oil incomes and they have to pay a lot of money for oil to buy it? At least we don’t need to buy oil and energy. It was always a problem for us but we couldn’t do anything because oil incomes made addict and lazy our economy like a drug. Now the US provides this opportunity for us so why shouldn’t we use this opportunity?
Thanks US for your attempts I know you want the best for Iran.
 
Last edited:
just like egypt, syria, lebanon, jordan and the rest of the arab countries promised they will push us to the sea 65 years ago? we all know how that ened !
we have a saying in israel that says "כלב שנובח לא נושך"
this mean : " a dog who barks doesnt bite"
 
just like egypt, syria, lebanon, jordan and the rest of the arab countries promised they will push us to the sea 65 years ago? we all know how that ened !
we have a saying in israel that says "כלב שנובח לא נושך"
this mean : " a dog who barks doesnt bite"

I dare you to test that logic and it may be a good opportunity to point out that this is not 65 years ago the world has moved forward.
 
Thanks for the laugh.
Iran can do damge,certinaly.
But the only thing that will level will be their d!ck by the end of the conflict.
 
Thanks for the laugh.
Iran can do damge,certinaly.
But the only thing that will level will be their d!ck by the end of the conflict.


We get it Israel, sheesh.

But how far in life will that get you? Yea you may drag the world down with you.

But what other legacy can you leave? What else can you bring to the world other than mass homicide from a war that erases all civilization?

If Israel were a individual person most people would consciously say they should be ashamed.
 
Israel may get more then it bargained for like all bullies in the end.

A senior Luftwaffe officer while visiting an RAF station underestimated the Spitfire and the RAF before war broke out. He called the Spitfire "A pretty little aeroplane." Never underestimate anyone, it'll bite you in the arse.
 
Israel may get more then it bargained for like all bullies in the end.

A senior Luftwaffe officer while visiting an RAF station underestimated the Spitfire and the RAF before war broke out. He called the Spitfire "A pretty little aeroplane." Never underestimate anyone, it'll bite you in the arse.

I would suggest that Israel is not bargaining on anything as it is expecting that the US will do its fighting on this matter and I am not sure I would consider Israel a bully here it is more like the scrawny kid that hides behind the big brother.

Sure it will rattle the sabres and ramp up the threat but it is doing it in order to stir up America not because it actually intends to come out of the shadows and front up itself as I am sure it knows the US is less likely to get involved in a war Israel starts than it is to "protect" Israel from an immediate threat now it just has to manufacture the threat.
 
Last edited:
We get it Israel, sheesh.

But how far in life will that get you? Yea you may drag the world down with you.

But what other legacy can you leave? What else can you bring to the world other than mass homicide from a war that erases all civilization?

If Israel were a individual person most people would consciously say they should be ashamed.
wtf?
Why are u telling us that?,we are the ones who threat to destroy other countries?
You're trying to make us the bad guys in this story,won't work on me buddy.

What it seems you are trying to tell us is that we should let Iran nuke us,cause if not there will be a war.
Thats very thoughtful,thank you.
 
Last edited:
wtf?
Why are u telling us that?,we are the ones who threat to destroy other countries?
You're trying to make us the bad guys in this story,won't work on me buddy.

Yep,.. you are quite correct, you don't threaten, you just flood the lands of others with illegal immigrants and occupy them killing those who resist.
It's not nice to see the truth without the candy coating is it.

Of course it won't work with you. It would be like trying to tell Himmler that Die Endlösung was a bad idea.
 
Last edited:
wtf?
Why are u telling us that?,we are the ones who threat to destroy other countries?
You're trying to make us the bad guys in this story,won't work on me buddy.

What it seems you are trying to tell us is that we should let Iran nuke us,cause if not there will be a war.
Thats very thoughtful,thank you.


If Israel followed International Law and stopped to behave like a two year old with a tantrum, people would perhaps view Israel differently.
 
If Israel followed International Law and stopped to behave like a two year old with a tantrum, people would perhaps view Israel differently.
International law does not consist of moral precepts that you or I might like. It consists of rules that states have agreed to, typically for self-interested reasons. A major theme of international law is that states have rights and privileges, while non-state entities like Gaza or Hamas do not. So while Israel can cite a right to self-defense, Hamas cannot.

The real question is whether people living in Gaza are entitled to sovereignty and independence, under current conditions. Israel believes that its security justifies limits on Palestinian autonomy. It does not trust Hamas to stop using violence against Israelis. Hamas, in turn, does not trust Israel, and will not forswear violence until Israel makes concessions to it, and perhaps not even if it does. The normal sources of international law—treaties and custom—do not resolve the underlying dispute.

If one peers through the fog of talk and looks at how states act, one can discern the bottom-line legal positions that count. Few states are willing to sanction or penalize Israel for its treatment of Gaza. That’s because supporting Hamas could translate into legal precedents that do not serve states’ interests. If you think of the Palestinians in Gaza as members of Israel’s population, then support for Hamas means support for the principle that internal populations may rise up, demand independence, and use violent means if their demands are rejected. Does China want Tibetans to cite such a precedent? Do the Turks want that for the Kurds? No, they do not. States have accepted few restrictions in theory, and virtually none in practice, on their ability to deal with insurgencies and related threats by unhappy populations under their control. So whatever moral claims the Palestinians in Gaza might advance, and however much sympathy they gain in other countries, they will not find a real ally in international law.
 
So whatever moral claims the Palestinians in Gaza might advance, and however much sympathy they gain in other countries, they will not find a real ally in international law.

Absolute rubbish! You views sound about what we could expect from a Zionist stooge, the only thing they lack is facts.

International law does not consist of moral precepts that you or I might like.
International law is in fact based on moral precepts, that is exactly what it is all about. Just because Israel ignores International law, does not mean that everyone does, and the world knows why.... Because, Israel claims statehood, yet fulfills almost none of the criteria under international law, it is in fact only an occupied territory.

European Jews occupied Palestine as illegal immigrants at the time of the British withdrawal,a withdrawal that was forced upon them by Zionist Terror attacks, flooding in and driving the native people out into adjoining countries where they remain to this day.

International law clearly States:
Israel Law Resource Center said:
2. Occupation Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation.
Source: http://www.israellawresourcecenter.org/

Some of Israel's List of Crimes as recognised under international law. The Worlds worst rogue State with over 200 condemnatory UN resolutions raised against it. Many of them binding resolutions of the Security Council.

Haaretz: Monday said:
Study: Israel leads in ignoring Security Council resolutions
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...ignoring-security-council-resolutions-1.31971

Israel Law Resource Center said:
CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL (1947-1954)*
1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land occupied by force during 1948 war (lands external to those recommended by the UN partition plan) (laws & principles violated, international response). (Resolution 181 was never ratified, it never went beyond being a "recommentation")
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep aproximately 750,000 Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting both in 1948 and in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied land not originally given to them in the UN Partition Plan (laws & principles violated, international response).
5. DESTRUCTION OF HOLY PLACES, AND INTERFERING WITH MINISTERS OF RELIGION PERFORMING THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES: Israeli forces have destroyed Muslim holy places, and interfered with the religious work of Muslim Imams (ministers) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).

ISRAELI STATEHOOD (1948-present)*
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).
12. PRACTICE OF RACISM: One of the primary purposes that the European Zionist organizations had for starting the State of Israel was to create a Jewish State, where the Jewish people could find sanctuary, control things, and prosper. This understandably has led to the passage of laws which give special favor throughout Israeli society to the Jewish people over all other people, and especially the native Palestinian Arab people. But giving special favor to one group of people above all other groups based on a criteria like what religion they are is, by definition, a form of racism. And, even though the leaders of the Zionist organizations thought such a policy was absolutely necessary to protect the Jewish people, it is still racism - a philosophy and practice which inevitably leads to terrible injustice and conflict (as we have seen throughout the history of Zionism in Palestine), and which thus must be condemned and prevented no matter what (laws & principles violated, international response).
13. PRACTICE OF APARTHEID: The State of Israel has a formal system of legalized discrimination against Palestinian Arabs which technically fits the official UN definition of Apartheid (laws & principles violated, international response).
17. VIOLATION OF ARAB FAMILY UNITY: In 2003, the Israeli legislature (Knesset) passed legislation that forbade spouses of Arab-Israeli citizens who are in the occupied territories from joining their families in Israel (with exceptions). The overt rationale is security concerns. The hidden reason for this legislation is to help maintain the Jewish demographic majority (laws & principles violated, international response).
 
Last edited:
ISRAELI OCCUPATION (1967-present)*
8. ILLEGAL MILITARY OCCUPATION: The current Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal. Military actions and occupations are considered legal only if they are based on self-defense (as Israel claims) or are designed to benefit the native population of the occupied areas, but it is now clear that Israel's occupation is illegal because Israeli implementation of it clearly is about:

(1) Acquisition of land into Israel by force, and
(2) Economic exploitation of the occupied areas via building up de facto Annexation on occupied lands --
(A) Extensive modification of local laws, and
(B) Building Israeli settlements on occupied lands (illegal population transfer),
(C) Building separation barrier not on border but through Palestinian communities displacing over 200,000 Palestinian civilians separating them from their families, work, schools, hospitals, etc.
(3) Inhumane suppression of rebellion is implemented through --
(A) Practice of Collective Punishment, and
(B) Extensive violations of Palestinian Human Rights.

All 7 of these policy actions are illegal according to international law (see details below), which thus makes the occupation itself illegal. Press HERE for more details and quotes from the law concerning the legality of Israel's occupation.

1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land taken by force during the 1967 war (East Jerusalem and Golan Heights) (laws & principles violated, international response).
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land (laws & principles violated, international response).
4. ILLEGAL MODIFICATION OF LOCAL LAW: Israel radically modifies local law following 1967 occupation beyond what is allowable under international law (violating Palestinian human rights and to the benefit of Israel's economy and the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and actually creating de facto annexation of much of the occupied territories) (laws & principles violated, international response).
6. ILLEGAL DE FACTO ANNEXATION: Israel creates de facto annexation of much of Palestinian territories occupied during 1967 war (as it radically alters local laws in order to apply Israeli law to the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and in violation of Palestinian rights of self-determination largely to the benefit of the Israeli economy) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).
9. VIOLATIONS OF RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION: Israel significantly violates the inalienable rights of self-determination of the Palestinian people (when it expropriated significant amounts of Palestinian land from Palestinians to build Israeli settlements, separation barriers, highways, and other structures which benefit Israeli citizens and businesses, but which also severely interfere with Palestinians' ability to work and do business, go to school, access medical facilities, and visit with members of their own families) (laws & principles violated, international response).
15. GENOCIDE: Although numbers of massacres and other lethal methodologies have been documented throughout the history of the Zionists and the State of Israel, evidence suggests that the overall intention of the Zionists and the government of Israel was to drive the Palestinian Arab people out of the area rather than to destroy them as is required by the definition of Genocide. On the other hand, there is some evidence that Israel intended to destroy the society and culture and economy of those Arabs that refused to leave, which under the modern definition, this would be considered to be Genocide. (laws & principles violated, international response).

GENERAL ZIONIST/ISRAELI VIOLATIONS*
10. VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS: Israel has significantly violated the human rights of the Palestinian people within Israel with its legalized Apartheid system of discrimination, and in the occupied territories with its system of political oppression, economic exploitation, and inhumane law enforcement practices primarily in response to the Palestinian rebellion against the above oppression and exploitation (laws & principles violated, international response).
11. VIOLATIONS OF UN RESOLUTIONS: Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (which are legally binding on member-nations), and almost 100 resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly (which are not binding, but represent the will and understanding of the international community). And Israel is now in violation of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 2004, condemning the separation wall Israel is building throughout the occupied West Bank (laws & principles violated, international response).
16. PRACTICE OF ETHNIC CLEANSING: The Zionist organizations, before the creation of the State of Israel, and then the Israeli government itself, have practiced many different forms of Ethnic Cleansing since the Zionist first came to Palestine in the early 1900's. The overt claim they rationalize this with is security concerns, but the greater long term reason is concern about maintaining a majority Jewish population so that they can maintain a democratic form of government which they dominate. Ethnic Cleansing is considered to be a severe breach of international law (laws & principles violated, international response).
...........
 
Last edited:
International law does not consist of moral precepts that you or I might like. It consists of rules that states have agreed to, typically for self-interested reasons. A major theme of international law is that states have rights and privileges, while non-state entities like Gaza or Hamas do not. So while Israel can cite a right to self-defense, Hamas cannot.

You are not even remotely correct, International law does not prohibit armed resistance to an enemy occupation and given that the areas where armed resistance is being carried out are defined as occupied territories they have every right to resist.

You argument that Israel has the right of self defense as a nation is conditional upon the acts being carried out in Israel but it is an army of occupation in the Palestinian territories and that is covered by a completely different set of laws.

I would also point out that Gaza is a land mass and not a resistance movement.
 
Yea and like a scrawny child, it can get picked on until it brings a gun to school and shoots up a bunch of other children.

Israel is nuclear armed, and if threatened they will black mail anyone even non involved nations until it goes their way.

End of story, a nuclear armed Iran, or hell nuclear armed anybody throws that all out of whack for Israel.

And bilateral nuclear disarmament although good for mankind, would be catastrophic for Israel. No nukes , and a financially collapsed America means no more Israel.

Which is why it's borderline hilarious if not for the serious tone of the situation that Israel gathers the world to look at Iran through a microscope for imaginary nuclear weapons while they have hundreds in their laundry room.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top