Video: “Doomsday,” says Gillerman, if Hezbollah hits Tel Aviv
posted at 4:35 pm on July 18, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
The line is drawn. If Nasrallah crosses it, Syria and Iran are coming in whether they want to or not.
The clip begins with him talking about the Lebanese government.
Ahmadinejad, whom Gillerman mentions, said earlier that “the day of happiness” is close at hand.
Update: Hezbollah holding Lebanon hostage isn’t just a metaphor.
Update: Root causes? Bush says Syria’s angling to get back into Lebanon, Olmert says Iran’s angling to distract the world from its nuke program.
86% of Israelis support the operation.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Actually, Doomsday begins if anyone takes a pot shot at the ships pulling civilians out of Beirut…
Romeo13 on July 18, 2006 at 5:23 PM
Ahmadinejad is Bagdad Bob with power. The ravings of a madman with no grasp on reality. If it were not sure to result in widescale death … one would almost beg for him to act on his promises. Please! Give us your best shot.
SirGregor on July 18, 2006 at 6:08 PM
It’s beginning to look more and more like Iran gravely miscalculated. I don’t think they anticipated Israels response. This is leaving the door further and further open for some action on Iran.
Well, you know what they say about playing with fire ….
darwin on July 18, 2006 at 6:16 PM
If you go to the link above, you will read something interesting. At first, I was wondering about the 14% of the Israeli’s who don’t support the operation. Then you will realize that 18.5% are “Arab”, i.e., not Jewish, i.e., mostly Muslim Palestinians. I am betting that approval for the operation split down religeous lines, meaning most of the Israeli Jews approved of it, and most of the Israeli Muslims opposed it.
It would be very interesting to see how closely the vote followed religeous lines. For example, if 98% of the Jews approved, and 2% of the Muslims approved, that would give us our 86% approval rating. Or if 68% of the Jews approved and 32% of the Muslims approved, again we would get our 86% approval rating.*
I don’t bring all this up just to throw a bunch of statistics that I did in my head arround to show how “smart” I am. The point of all of this is I am wondering how the Israeli Muslims feel about all of this. Ironically, the lower the Jewish approval, the better it makes the Muslims look as far as viewing the State of Israel as “their” state, and not some “illegal zionist entity.” It means they are closer to really accepting Israel as a state and that they are really citizens of it. Unfortunately, the higher the Jewish approval, the less positive things can be seen in Muslim approval.
Thoughts?
EFG on July 18, 2006 at 8:00 PM
*All my math was done on the fly in my head. If you do it with actual statistics calculations, you will get slightly different numbers.
EFG on July 18, 2006 at 8:01 PM
Okay, I’m in Gillermania too, but I hope that HE is not. The Doomsday remark may be a calculated comment, designed as a warning, but it might also be Gillerman going off the reservation in his new-found popularity. I greatly hope it is the first case.
I’d like to be a fly on the wall at Gillerman-Bolton lunch meeting.
haakondahl on July 18, 2006 at 8:17 PM
I’d like to see the first Iran-bound missile fired by the USS Jimmy Carter; if only for the delicious irony that the only reason it’s there in the first place is because its namesake didn’t have the sack to confront this kind of tyranny in the first place.
Kid from Brooklyn on July 18, 2006 at 8:24 PM
Did anyone catch how he said “the international community has allowed…” there at the end? That’s what I hate…this idea that Israel’s right to defend herself is not absolute like it is for everyone else.
JollyRoger on July 18, 2006 at 8:37 PM
JollyRoger
Relax–he meant that the international community so far hasn’t forced a diplomatic stalemate, thanks to Bush and the ineffectiveness of the UN in pursuing its anti-Israel agenda.
Nice nic, BTW.
haakondahl on July 18, 2006 at 9:42 PM
Haakon,
Thanks :). I know what he meant, but it still galls me that the “int’l community” will, eventually, step in like it did in every other Arab-Israeli war and not let Israel win. Millions massacred in Sudan and Rwanda? UN hasn’t a care in the world. The Jews putting a final end to Hizbollah in Lebanon? Well, we just can’t have that.
JollyRoger on July 18, 2006 at 10:19 PM
I’m just waiting for Bill Clinton to keep his promise to the Jewish people. Remember when he said the following?
“The Israelis know that if the Iraqi or the Iranian army came across the Jordan River, I would personally grab a rifle, get in a ditch, and fight and die.” — Bill Clinton
Well there are plenty of ditches in Israel now. Will Clinton finally pick up a rifle and defend Israel from the terrorist scourge.
Scorched_Earth on July 18, 2006 at 10:44 PM
Will Fox PULEEZE axe those two doofuses on DaySide?
It’s like Einstein being questioned by two chimpanzees.
speed647 on July 18, 2006 at 11:00 PM
Axe them? They’re getting their own morning show on the “free” network, which airs live at 9AM Eastern, starting in September.
Kid from Brooklyn on July 19, 2006 at 10:26 AM
I hope to God that Hezbollah can’t back up this threat, but I’m not exactly sure that they can’t. They’ve demonstrated that Iran has been augmenting their technology.
Also, there’s this. And as of this morning, this.
kaseiryu on July 19, 2006 at 11:16 AM
“Hezbollah officials gave CNN exclusive access to the southern suburbs of Beirut — the area thought to house the organization’s headquarters, CNN’s Nic Robertson reported.”
Let me repeat “Hazbollah gave exclusive access to the southern surburb of Birut”
So where is Lebanon located, exactly or is Beirut now the Capital of Hazbollahland?
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on July 19, 2006 at 1:01 PM
What I can’t understand is why it is only hitting Tel Aviv that will mean ‘doomsday’.
From a practical point of view, that is kind of like The U.S. President saying: “Well, you can blow up Tacoma, Denver, Des Moines, Atlanta and Chicago, and we will just make a half effort to punish you, but don’t you dare blow up Washington DC.”.
And from a religious point of view, I don’t think ‘prophecy’ mentions Tel Aviv specifically. (does it?)
LegendHasIt on July 19, 2006 at 9:47 PM
Comment pages: