Iran To Israel: "We'll Show You Hell"

Tyler Durden's picture

While we are looking for the full IAEA report blasting Iran and specifically its nuclear program, claiming that Iran carried out work relevant for developing nuclear arms according to a UN report citing 'credible' info, as well as having information of activities in Iran specific to nuclear weapons, we already know what Iran's response is to any potential 'provocations' from Israel. To wit: "We'll show you 'hell'" UPI explains: "Israel will learn the true meaning of "hell" if it decides a military strike against Iran is worth the risk, an Iranian national security official said. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is said to have been reviewing strike plans against Iran's nuclear infrastructure as the International Atomic Energy Agency expressed concerns about Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Iranian officials have said any attack on its nuclear infrastructure would be suicidal." And the soundbites keep getting better: "If a military challenge is started against Iran in the region, the Zionist regime will definitely be faced with a hell," Javad Jahangirzadeh, a lawmaker on Iran's national security commission, told the semiofficial Fars News Agency." Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, in a Tuesday interview with Israel Radio, said Israel doesn't want war. If dragged into conflict, he said, the casualties would be low. "Israel is the strongest country in the region and it will stay that way," he added." And while a few weeks or even days ago, the outcome of this event would have been easily predictable, following the just announced "microphone" gaffe involving Sarkozy, Obama and Netanyahu, suddenly the odds are far more interesting. Regardless, at this point, aside from concluding that Keynesians everywhere must be rejoicing at the imminent GDP boost driven by the military-industrial complex, we can also venture to gamble: short glass manufacturers. In a few months there may be a natural glut.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SheepDog-One's picture

Yea but where? Over 80 'possible nuclear sites' all over Iran North South East and West. 

Really....this question gets 'thumbs down'? Why, because you cant answer the simple question? WHERE are you going to 'bomb'?

wanklord's picture

The only way Barry & Associates (including the Zionist warmongers) can justify a war against the Islamic Republic of Iran is by staging another false flag attack on continental United States: most likely a controlled nuclear explosion (dirty bomb) targeting a major urban concentration that may kill dozens of thousands of civilians. 

This operation will be carried out by the CIA in partnership with Mossad and MI6 to subsequently be blamed on AlQaeda working in conjunction with elements of Iran's IRGC and Pakistan's ISI.

Besides that, Americans are a bunch of stupid animals easy to manipulate and subdue. The psychological impact of this event will elicit the brute and ignorant populace to demand a massive retaliation against the alleged perpetrators (explicitly Iran); the Obama administration will need the unconditional support of these mules in order to further their agenda.

Absent of this essential prerequisite (a false flag operation), President Soetoro won't be able to persuade US Congress to issue a formal declaration of war.

gmrpeabody's picture

Did I miss the tin foil sale at Costco?

Too funny...

phyuckyiu's picture

Actually Peabody you missed your critical thinking class, but it's ok, most blew off the class with you. I love how all the people who want to bomb Iran have no idea how we are going to survive 10$ gas as a nation, nor how Europe will survive 20$ gas. Their ignorance of how small the Straits of Hormuz is definitely showing.

The Big Ching-aso's picture

You know we can always nuke the Straits to be a lot wider if we needed to.

phyuckyiu's picture

I needed some humor in this thread, thx for that :)

cranky-old-geezer's picture



If America / Israel / NATO (North Atlantic Terror Organization) bomb / attack / invade Iran, we can all plan on WWIII.

And it'll be all nuclear.  Rothschilds / Bilderburgs / etc get their wish, reducing world population a few billion.

Have a nice day.

MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

persuade US Congress to issue a formal declaration of war.

Formal declaration of war...I remember when they used to do that.

gmrpeabody's picture

Never said I was in favor of bombing anybody...,

only that I am not in the school of those who believe the US/CIA/FBI attacked us on 911.

And since you seem interested, I am SO stupid, that I actually believe we send people to the moon and back. Can you believe it? I don't recall even being offered a class in critical thinking though, and that may have something to do with it. We obviously went to different schools together.

I will strive to be as thoughtful and intelligent as yourself.., cross my heart.

DaveyJones's picture

you're right, the FBI was clearly pushed out of the loop (Dick's orders)

phyuckyiu's picture

The bombing comment wasn't directed at you, hence the word 'their' instead of 'your'. Also, because someone has a hard time questioning their beliefs on how the world works doesn't make them stupid, nor would I ever call you that. I would never claim i'm superior to you either, but your anger proves you'll never think outside your box. Not sure what the moon shot has to do with anything, other than try to claim i'm a conspiracy theorist. I'm sorry you are so ignorant to believe the U.S. and Israel don't plan false flags. Since the Gulf of Tonkin was proved to be fake, and the Six Day War was started based on 'reliable intelligence', enjoy your ignorance (ignorance is not stupidity, to clarify again). Thanks for the attempted insults though, but I have no superiority complex, so this doesn't really insult me.

d_senti's picture

I don't believe the US govt carried out 9/11 either (though I appear to be in the minority on ZH here), but I certainly wouldn't put it past our government to do such a thing. Nor do I discount the possibility that it's true. I just haven't been convinced, even though there are obviously discrepencies in the official story.

I don't think the above prediction is right, but I'm glad it's been made, honestly. If it does actually happen, then I would consider it fairly strong evidence of govt involvement and of that particular viewpoint as a whole. I've bashed conspiratorial thinking on this site before, but it's the trend in thinking that bothers me, not the possibility of conspiracy. Many seem to fall into the camp because they have lost all trust in government - and rightly so - but knowing they could and knowing they did are two different things. So long as one believes it from strong evidence, I'm perfectly open to the idea.

Some people here on ZH predicted the possibility of an imminent domestic terrorist attack as a cover for a crackdown on certain anti-governmental groups. Sure enough, not 5 days later, there were four senior citizens (!) arrested for plotting a terrorist attack. I found that quite fishy.

Many people seem convinced of recent/future false flag attacks because it plays so well into the agenda of certain interests in power today. Nevertheless, I don't think they NEED false flag attacks to execute their interests. As there are really hundreds of millions of people who hate the US, at most they would have to simply let security "slip up" in a certain case to get what they want.

The US, China, and Russia (et al.) are all playing at a new type of subversive warfare. We play various interests against our frenemies in such a way that we can't be found directly guilty of wrongdoing. Russia, for instance, helped train al-qaeda top brass, funneled weapons into iraq/afghanistan through other channels, an are directly aiding the construction of nuclear facilities in Iran. Meanwhile the US has aided, supplied, and militarily supported Israel for its own purposes in the same area.

It's not a proxy war, exactly, rather the next level beyond that. I don't believe there is one monolithic, controlling power at the top orchestrating events; I see a few competing groups striking each other via 4th/5th generational warfare tactics. I think that's where terrorist operations in the US come into play and what has driven various recent events in the middle east. But I could be wrong.

And I don't think you're stupid for not agreeing, naturally. Just my two cents.

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

I think that wanklord's thesis is certainly plausible, perhaps even probable.

For the sake of accuracy, and I hope I'm not being too pedantic, I'd like to point out that a so-called dirty bomb does not entail any kind of nuclear explosion. Rather, it employs a conventional charge to scatter radioactive contaminants. In essence, the hydrogen explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant were dirty bombs, in that the explosive force came from the deflagration/detonation of a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen.


randomdrift's picture

That is one source of very small radioactive particles floating in the atmosphere.  The chemtrails determine where they will fall to earth.

I went out and measured radiation levels around the Olympic Peninsula WA. It is very significantly higher where they do heavy chemtrail spraying.  It doesn't really matter whether the chemtrails cause clouds to form and the rain brings the particles down or whether they are spraying the particles themselves, for it comes to the same thing.

Nadaclue's picture

Here is a site you may or may not be aware of. Just a bunch of private citizens who purchased radiation monitors and hooked into a real time net display. It auto updates itself each minute. Sometimes monitors go offline for whatever reason. It also sounds an audible alert if the count per minute goes to >99

redpill's picture

Since when does he need a declaration of war?  It will just be some "kinetic military action" that will be over in "days, not weeks."


Carlyle Groupie's picture

Israel attacking Iran is the real Pandora's Box.

JoeSexPack's picture

I've met Pandora, & her box is much nicer than that.

Michael's picture

I hope when this WWIII thing gets started, the Chinese use their kinetic energy space weapons to destroy the entire space satellite and communication systems rendering satellite space unusable for decades. 

China’s Anti-Satellite Weapon Test

Dr. Acula's picture

Fine, but will I still be able to check facebook every 5 minutes?


Precious's picture

No government would risk shutting down the internet because everyone would go outside and pitch tents in front of the ATT or Verizon store.

HungrySeagull's picture

Actually I think the Sonnets and other very high level large internet hubs are quite valid in war. Take them out and you darken alot of information.


Hell, the Net was designed to provide a sort of a nigger-rigged survivable communications in event of all out nuclear exchange with the USSR.


As far as the bombs, just need a bunch of those very ultra deep penetrators I have heard of from time to time from Boeing. Little snippets like production was being started last year and things like that. They really should keep that stuff secret until ready for use.

Umh's picture

The Internet protocols are designed to be surviable. Governments desires to funnel everything through checkpoints defeats the design of the protocols:)

peekcrackers's picture

You met her asian sister Panwhora

Larry Darrell's picture

When was the last time the US Congress issued a formal declaration of war???


john39's picture

yeah, according to obummer's constitutional scholars, it would just be a "kinetic" action, so... all good. /s

DaveyJones's picture

or did anything constructive

disabledvet's picture

A what? I thought all we had to do was tell the guy "it's time to go"? that's declaratory...

Mark701's picture

Good question. I'm thinking WW II.

j0nx's picture

Puhleeze. I know of nobody that would believe any kind of attack on America would be Iran's fault. Pull the other one. People are a LOT wiser to the scams of the oligarchs these days than they ever were. They pushed their fraud and scams too far and woke the sleeping masses and now nobody trusts their government. The American people simply won't stand for another war with a country that did nothing to us. I venture to say that a lot of soldiers would tell them to go shit in their hat too after just coming home from 10 years of unending wars against 'foes' with little to no proof that they were ever really our foe to begin with.

Abitdodgie's picture

The Amerikan people will go to war with Iran at the drop of a hat why ,the wars never bother American citizens (dancing with the stars is never stoped) 2 most Americans think Iran has Nukes, 3 the rest are just so stupid they dont't care ,as you see from the first comment on this page.

Woodyg's picture

4. Hey i think al queada is being financed by Iran........

5. Take the heat off of israel - an aparthied state committing crimes according to the Geneva Convention -

Woodyg's picture

4. Hey i think al queada is being financed by Iran........

5. Take the heat off of israel - an aparthied state committing crimes according to the Geneva Convention -

Smithovsky's picture

That was making fun of an idiot who came very close to becoming a US president but hey, feel free to read into it whatever you like.  

HungrySeagull's picture

We have been at war since those Marines got blown up in Beruit and no one did a goddamn thing.


Fallujah was revenge best served fast and hard.

Rick64's picture

Why were we in Beruit? I am not condoning the killing of marines, but we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Hi Ho Silver's picture

Why is a matter of conjecture.  What we were doing there was saving Arafat's ass, when we should have been killing the filthy bastard and his cohorts.

i-dog's picture

Very much closer than you could know. Arafat was the son of the Mufti of Jerusalem and had at least 9 private audiences with the Pope. He was an integral part of Rome's plans to regain Jerusalem and therefore a protected son of the CIA.

Rick64's picture

I would surmise that you adhere to the Vatican Assassins ideology ( I don't).  I know the Vatican has a lot of power and influence, but are you suggesting that they pulled the strings to have U.S. Marines protect Arafat? If they had this much power then why didn't they just stop the IDF from attacking through U.S. coercion. When Palestine was under British Mandate wouldn't it have been much easier for the Vatican to gain control? When Jerusalem and the West Bank were occupied by Jordan wouldn't that have been an opportune time too? I don't doubt the Vatican's attempts to control Jerusalem, but they seemed to have failed miserably which doesn't add up if they are controlling the world.

 Regardless the marines or any military shouldn't be put in harms way unless the U.S. is directly threatened or attacked.

i-dog's picture

"I would surmise that you adhere to the Vatican Assassins ideology"

I don't "adhere" to any ideology. I take in all points of view, do my own research, and attempt to connect the dots. Phelps provides a lot of useful research, but is also blinded by his own religion into seeing connections that raise contradictions. His overall thesis is, however, sound and provides a better fit to events than does conventional "It's the Joos! ... No, it's the bankers! ... No, it's the Catholics!" of mainstream debate.

"are you suggesting that they pulled the strings to have U.S. Marines protect Arafat?"

It's more complex than that. They don't micro-manage individual events from a central "war room"!

Rather, they provide and support an intellectual and political framework that includes very influential plants in all areas of government and industry who are working towards the Luciferian ideology of a global super-state ... but each with their own view of what would be "helpful" or "expected".

This means that sometimes one arm is unwittingly working against another to create "unintended consequences". It should also be recognised that even the Vatican itself has opposing factions struggling for control at every turn and within each generation.

That's why they have not achieved overall success in well over 500 years of attempting to stifle freedom ... and will continue to fail, IMO. The current fiasco in Europe is just one example of their failures.

As to your specific tactical questions, I could write a book on each of them. Let's just say thet contrived "problem" and contrived "reaction" don't always result in the expected contrived "solution"!

Central planning doesn't work but they'll still keep trying.

Rick64's picture

 Thanks for the clarifications. Glad I'm not the only one that sees the contradictions in Phelps connections.  I am not convinced that the NWO is of the Luciferian ideology, but I haven't really researched it extensively.

Rick64's picture

 I think society is being conditioned by the gov. and media to see Iran as evil just as Saddam was ( I know its obvious). The Iraqi war was a long time in the making and this one is too. By the time we go to war with Iran the economy will be so bad that many will join the military just to have a job.  The U.S. has to get control of as much oil as possible to ensure the reserve currency status as well as squeezing out Russian and Chinese control and influence.  Whoever controls the worlds oil, will control the economies of the world including their monetary systems. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons that would be a game changer that the U.S. can't allow.

Troll Magnet's picture

I wish you were right but you're wrong.  If Americans were awake, Ron Paul would be running away with the GOP nomination by now.  We're still asleep.  We might be in a coma.

lolmao500's picture

As the saying goes, the louder a dog bark, the smaller he is.

Iran is a weak country, to make up for it, they scream... they are trying to bluff us, but if you take a close look at the Iranian military, you would know that NATO would have total air superiority within a few days, easy.

Now if you though of invading... that would go like Iraq.

If you thought of OCCUPYING... now that's suicide.

Occupying is the only way (aside from regime change) to make sure they never get nukes.

But just bombing them (just like Osirak) will make sure they get nukes...

If you remember Iraq post-Osirak... before Osirak, they had something like 700 scientists working on a program... and they would be able to do 1 bomb every year... and they had a budget of $400 million.

After the strike : team of 8000+ scientists. Aiming for 6 bombs a year. Budget of $10 billion.


So go ahead Israel, bomb Iran and see what happens.

UP Forester's picture

Don't forget all the Russian nuke scientists at the Iranian sites.  Or the former Soviet chemical and biological scientists Iran picked up for a song after the 'Stans broke off and they were hungry.