Not entirely accurate. According to the Greek historian Flavius Arranius, Alexander DID capture the city in 332 BC. However, he didn't "lay waste" to it. One of his naval siege engines managed to knock a part of the southern wall down. After a few futile storming attempts, Alexander supposedly lead a storming party that was able to follow the wall around to the palace. In any event, he didn't destroy the city (made sacrifice at the temple of Heracles, held a few games, then went off to fight Darius). The moll he constructed caused the part between the mainland and the island to eventually silt up (which is why it appears like a penninsula today). The mainland portion of the city when Alexander arrived wasn't much - a fishing and land-trading area. The rocks he used to build the moll (actually two of them), had to be hauled in from quite a distance up and down the coast - even using every stick from the mainland town wouldn't have sufficed. It was simply too small.
In addition, Tyre was NOT a Phoenecian city at the time of Alexander, it was a Persian city. It certainly started out Phoenecian (around 2500 BC). In fact, there was never any such thing as a "Phoenecian Empire" - they were a rather loose collection of citystates. Tyre itself was captured around 1800 BC by the Egyptians, regained independence briefly around 538 BC, then fell under the Persians. The last use of the term "Phoenecian" for any of the area died out under the Romans - the old kingdoms being incorporated into the Roman province of Syria. The last of the great Phoencian cities - Carthage - also was finally destroyed by the Romans.
I'm not sure how this effects your prophecy thingy. However, the archeological record is pretty clear about the history part.
As jar pointed out, Arranius' history indicates that Alexander spared most of the city's rulers (magistrates) when they took refuge in the temple Alexander wanted to worship in (which was the proximate cause of the siege in the first place). He did supposedly take 30,000 Tyrenian soldiers and sold them into slavery, as well as killing some 8,000 more during the siege and assault itself. As with any of the ancient historians, we should probably take those numbers with a largish grain of salt. However, he left the normal inhabitants of the city pretty much alone.