Giddianhi makes this war personal by claiming injustices against his people, particularly those in the army. It is not inconceivable that one of the defeats at the hands of the Nephites was construed as such a wrong against them. Regardless of what created the sentiment, Giddianhi uses it to suggest that his well-trained army has an even greater incentive and desire to “visit you with utter destruction.” Giddianhi is placing the stakes on this battle very high. Rather than a simple war to create a tribute state, he declares that this could be a war of annihilation.
This threat of destruction invokes the image of certain military situations from the later Aztecs:
“Burning a city to accomplish its defeat was not common. But depending on the town’s willingness to negotiate, the city might be burned if it did not surrender once its main temple had been fired. When the Aztecs defeated Coaixtlahuacan, for example, the people fled to tstrongholds atop the nearby hills. Thereupon the Aztecs burned the temple, but they refrained from razing the city when its inhabitants pledged to pay tribute. But when the lords of Alahuiztlan refused to submit and become tributaries, the city was razed.” (Ross Hassig. Aztec Warfare. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1988, pp.105-6).
This threatening letter appears to be laying out a similar range of options. Submission as a tributary is acceptable, but failure to submit would mean destruction.