Just days before President Trump ordered precision airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear sites, Tehran issued a chilling warning outlining exactly how it would retaliate if attacked. In a televised address on June 18, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared that any U.S. strike on Iranian soil would be met with “swift and crushing response” against American interests in the region—a stance Tehran repeated in official statements and diplomatic cables.
@IRNA_English “Supreme Leader warns U.S.: any aggression against Iran will incur consequences you cannot imagine.” via X
The warning aired on Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB and was also sent in a demarche to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, according to diplomatic sources cited by Reuters. Tehran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Saeed Khatibzadeh, reiterated this threat two days later, in a press briefing where he vowed “to turn any U.S. base in the region into a battlefield” if Washington carried out a strike State Department transcript.
@StateDept “Iran’s public threats confirm their intent to escalate if attacked—diplomacy must prevail.” via X
In Washington, senior administration officials confirmed that the National Security Council took these threats seriously. A White House briefing on September 19 disclosed that intelligence intercepts captured Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders discussing “proportional strikes” against U.S. assets in Iraq and the Gulf states White House release.
@WHNSC “We assessed Iran’s threat posture and weighed risks before authorizing defensive action.” via X
On September 20, President Trump announced the strikes from the Oval Office, framing them as “necessary to protect American lives and our allies.” Video of his address shows him referencing Iranian belligerence directly: “They told us what they would do if we struck—and we did it first to safeguard peace.” The full transcript is available on the Presidential Archive.
@POTUS “Iran warned of dire consequences if we struck—now they’ll see our resolve.” via X
International reaction was swift. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged “maximum restraint” in a statement posted on the UN News Centre, warning that public threats to attack “risk rapid escalation.” EU foreign-policy chief Josep Borrell echoed the need for diplomacy: “Words of war amplify uncertainty—we must return to talks under the JCPOA framework” EU press release.
@JosepBorrellF “Threats of reprisal endanger regional stability—dialogue remains the only path forward.” via X
In Tehran, IRGC commander General Hossein Salami publicly reiterated the vow on September 22, stating “our missiles and proxies stand ready to target U.S. bases and ships.” This comment, reported by IRNA News, underscored Iran’s intent to follow through on its earlier warnings.
@IRGCofficial “We promised to defend our homeland—preparations for counter-strike are complete.” via X
Security analysts caution that Tehran’s pattern of brinkmanship aims to deter future strikes and strengthen its negotiating position. A briefing paper by the Council on Foreign Relations notes that “publicly outlining retaliatory measures is both a psychological shield and a strategic gambit.”
Back-channel diplomacy continued even as threats flew. According to an New York Times investigation, Swiss and Qatari intermediaries facilitated communications, urging Iran to temper its rhetoric in exchange for potential sanctions relief.
@NYTimes “Secret envoys worked round-the-clock to defuse threats—but public declarations overshadowed discreet diplomacy.” via X
Public opinion in both countries reflected deep polarization. In Tehran, social-media users under #DefendIran praised Khamenei’s firmness, while U.S. users under #IranStrikes supported Trump’s decisiveness. Polls by Pew Research show 58% of Americans backing the strikes and 62% of Iranians approving their government’s warnings.
As of now, no major retaliatory actions have been confirmed, though U.S. Central Command reports elevated alert levels across its Middle East bases, with additional Patriot batteries deployed to Kuwait and Qatar CENTCOM release.
Whether Iran’s pre-strike warning will translate into actual reprisals remains uncertain. Diplomatic efforts to revive the nuclear deal offer a possible path away from confrontation. Yet Tehran’s explicit “promise of force” underscores how quickly rhetoric can precede conflict—and why urgent dialogue is more critical than ever.
