I have no specific knowledge here, but purely considering the military implications (specifically not commenting on humanitarian concerns), it seems strictly better to me to force the other side...
I have no specific knowledge here, but purely considering the military implications (specifically not commenting on humanitarian concerns), it seems strictly better to me to force the other side to ration their resources.
Also, if/when Hamas draws from their stockpiles, it might be visible to Israeli military intelligence (whether on the ground or in the air), which opens up the possibility of targeting the stockpiles directly. So supplies will likely be exhausted much faster than the advertised three to four months.
Yes, it makes logical sense that it's a disadvantage to any army under siege to have more mouths to feed who can't fight. Here's some background on siege tactics in an article written shortly...
Yes, it makes logical sense that it's a disadvantage to any army under siege to have more mouths to feed who can't fight.
Because of their devastating human costs, sieges have inspired specific law of war rules and legal considerations. But as with legal limits on war generally, these rules reflect a compromise between human needs and military demands. Siege rules fully vindicate neither humanity nor military necessity; each concedes something to the other. The current conflict [in Ukraine] may well reveal whether these rules, and the compromises they reflect, are relevant, practical, and optimal in both military and humanitarian terms.
Here's a reminder of what happened in Ukraine:
In, for now, an encouraging sign, Ukraine and Russia have reportedly agreed to organize safe corridors to evacuate civilians and deliver humanitarian supplies. The extent to which these agreements will be observed or hold as pressure mounts to maintain isolation of besieged cities will be important not only to the fate of war’s victims but also to the law.
These "safe corridors" weren't always safe, but at least they (sometimes) existed, and many civilians evacuated that way. In that respect, at least, the Ukraine war was not as bad as what's going on in Gaza.
Perhaps such "safe corridors" could eventually be negotiated for Gaza? But to where?
In a more normal situation it would hopefully force the civilian stragglers out but in this situation where do they go. Ignoring civilians (which they shouldn't!) I don't think its pointless to...
In a more normal situation it would hopefully force the civilian stragglers out but in this situation where do they go.
Ignoring civilians (which they shouldn't!) I don't think its pointless to force them to use their stockpiles. Those stock won't last forever and the IDF will be locating and destroying them as a military target.
17 years ago they were the elected government, but they've declined to hold elections since then. As it stands it's hard to argue that they still have a mandate from the population at large, the...
17 years ago they were the elected government, but they've declined to hold elections since then. As it stands it's hard to argue that they still have a mandate from the population at large, the majority of which weren't born when the last election was held.
I can't see Hamas using their stockpile to supply their citizens --- three to four months of supplies for 40000 people is about 2.5 days for 2 million people, before distribution costs. This...
I can't see Hamas using their stockpile to supply their citizens --- three to four months of supplies for 40000 people is about 2.5 days for 2 million people, before distribution costs.
This probably also puts into perspective why Israel is so reluctant to allow humanitarian aid. Even if this aid is earmarked for civilian use only, Hamas would only need to divert 2% to fully supply themselves, which seems very possible in the general chaos.
Wikipedia says 20-25 thousand (and the source they link to is the US National Counterterrorism Center) but OK, let's take those numbers as a high-end estimate. 40,000 people, supplies for 4...
A senior Lebanese official said Hamas, which is estimated to number between 35,000 and 40,000, had enough stocked away to keep fighting for three to four months without resupply.
Wikipedia says 20-25 thousand (and the source they link to is the US National Counterterrorism Center)
but OK, let's take those numbers as a high-end estimate. 40,000 people, supplies for 4 months.
that is 4.8 million person-days of supplies.
the population of Gaza is 2.3 million people.
so as a rough estimate, if Hamas distributed its stockpile among the people instead of hoarding it for its own uses, it would last 2 days.
obviously this doesn't apply to all of the resources they have stockpiled, but as a back-of-the-envelope calculation, it shows how far the "rich trove" described in the headline would actually last.
this smells like it's manufacturing consent to try to justify Israel's blockade of Gaza that has been in place since 2005, and has significantly tightened since October 7th.
On 24 January 2008, the United Nations Human Rights Council released a statement calling for Israel to lift its siege on the Gaza Strip, allow the continued supply of food, fuel, and medicine, and reopen border crossings.
On 15 December 2008, following a statement in which he described the embargo on Gaza as a crime against humanity, United Nations Special Rapporteur Richard A. Falk was prevented from entering the Palestinian territories by Israeli authorities and expelled from the region.
A UN Fact Finding mission in September 2009 led by South African Judge Richard Goldstone (the Goldstone report) concluded that the blockade was possibly a crime against humanity, and recommended that the matter be referred to the International Criminal Court if the situation has not improved in six months.
In March 2010, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon stated that the blockade of Gaza is causing "unacceptable suffering" and that families were living in "unacceptable, unsustainable conditions".
In May 2010, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs stated that the formal economy in Gaza has collapsed since the imposition of the blockade. They also stated that the "restrictions imposed on the civilian population by the continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip amount to collective punishment, a violation of international humanitarian law."
I can’t say I ever expected to see apologia for collective punishment – an honest-to-God violation of the Geneva Convention – here on Tildes, but here we are. I don’t care what Hamas has done when...
I can’t say I ever expected to see apologia for collective punishment – an honest-to-God violation of the Geneva Convention – here on Tildes, but here we are.
I don’t care what Hamas has done when this comes into the picture, because starving and dehydrating millions of innocent people in response is unacceptable and cannot be justified. The Israeli government is and has been doing far worse to the people of Gaza than Hamas could ever even dream of doing to Israel, and yet people go to bat for them regardless. I will never understand this.
Alternate title: As gazans scrounge for food and water, israel sits on a treasure trove of supplies I cant read the article cause its paywalled but yeesh is this meant to get you angry at hamas...
Alternate title: As gazans scrounge for food and water, israel sits on a treasure trove of supplies
I cant read the article cause its paywalled but yeesh is this meant to get you angry at hamas and palestinians while continuing to ignore why they would be stockpiling for war.
Here you go: https://archive.ph/j5BAk The reporters are writing about what they were able to learn about Hamas's supplies, and your proposed headline ignores that entirely. It would be a headline...
The reporters are writing about what they were able to learn about Hamas's supplies, and your proposed headline ignores that entirely. It would be a headline for an entirely different and less interesting story.
Thank you for the link. I dont think there is any story that could be less interesting than this one though. The article spends the whole time essentially trying to convince you that militaries...
Thank you for the link. I dont think there is any story that could be less interesting than this one though. The article spends the whole time essentially trying to convince you that militaries don't stockpile and take care of logistics before an invasion/major attack, then lightly brushes off its understanding of this fact then continues to let israelis speak about how its hamas's burden to provide the UN with fuel.
Meanwhile, my headline's story would be one about how israel spends tons of money on its PR in the west to justify collective punishment and then blame the victims.
I think you're referring to this: And I think you're misinterpreting that? Reporting what the Israeli spokesman said doesn't make it look good. It seems callous and cynical to me. Reporters don't...
I think you're referring to this:
Asked about the situation, Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus, an Israeli military spokesman, told reporters that if Gazans or the United Nations need fuel, they should get it from Hamas.
And I think you're misinterpreting that? Reporting what the Israeli spokesman said doesn't make it look good. It seems callous and cynical to me. Reporters don't need to explicitly tell the reader how they should feel, and I appreciate that they didn't do that.
Also, the article doesn't try to convince you that militaries don't stockpile. The bit of historical context it gives is about how this sort of thing has happened before:
History abounds of well-supplied armies fighting on the front lines while the home front went hungry. Germans, for instance, endured what became known as the “Turnip Winter” at the height of World War I, even as the Kaiser’s armies were well provisioned. They eventually lost and the German Empire fell.
(Although, it's not a particularly sympathetic example.)
Damn, Hamas could have given the 3000+ dead children that Israel murdered some bread and water before they were exploded and buried alive. Sick of this manufactured consent, already banned on...
Damn, Hamas could have given the 3000+ dead children that Israel murdered some bread and water before they were exploded and buried alive. Sick of this manufactured consent, already banned on reddit despite remaining civil, but I'll continue to speak up on tildes where it's small enough that there isn't overwhelming Israeli propaganda.
From a military point of view, cutting off supplies for the entire Gaza strip seems pretty pointless? They already stocked up.
I have no specific knowledge here, but purely considering the military implications (specifically not commenting on humanitarian concerns), it seems strictly better to me to force the other side to ration their resources.
Also, if/when Hamas draws from their stockpiles, it might be visible to Israeli military intelligence (whether on the ground or in the air), which opens up the possibility of targeting the stockpiles directly. So supplies will likely be exhausted much faster than the advertised three to four months.
Yes, it makes logical sense that it's a disadvantage to any army under siege to have more mouths to feed who can't fight.
Here's some background on siege tactics in an article written shortly after the start of the Ukraine war:
Here's a reminder of what happened in Ukraine:
These "safe corridors" weren't always safe, but at least they (sometimes) existed, and many civilians evacuated that way. In that respect, at least, the Ukraine war was not as bad as what's going on in Gaza.
Perhaps such "safe corridors" could eventually be negotiated for Gaza? But to where?
In a more normal situation it would hopefully force the civilian stragglers out but in this situation where do they go.
Ignoring civilians (which they shouldn't!) I don't think its pointless to force them to use their stockpiles. Those stock won't last forever and the IDF will be locating and destroying them as a military target.
17 years ago they were the elected government, but they've declined to hold elections since then. As it stands it's hard to argue that they still have a mandate from the population at large, the majority of which weren't born when the last election was held.
I can't see Hamas using their stockpile to supply their citizens --- three to four months of supplies for 40000 people is about 2.5 days for 2 million people, before distribution costs.
This probably also puts into perspective why Israel is so reluctant to allow humanitarian aid. Even if this aid is earmarked for civilian use only, Hamas would only need to divert 2% to fully supply themselves, which seems very possible in the general chaos.
Wikipedia says 20-25 thousand (and the source they link to is the US National Counterterrorism Center)
but OK, let's take those numbers as a high-end estimate. 40,000 people, supplies for 4 months.
that is 4.8 million person-days of supplies.
the population of Gaza is 2.3 million people.
so as a rough estimate, if Hamas distributed its stockpile among the people instead of hoarding it for its own uses, it would last 2 days.
obviously this doesn't apply to all of the resources they have stockpiled, but as a back-of-the-envelope calculation, it shows how far the "rich trove" described in the headline would actually last.
this smells like it's manufacturing consent to try to justify Israel's blockade of Gaza that has been in place since 2005, and has significantly tightened since October 7th.
from Oxfam in 2018: Timeline: the humanitarian impact of the Gaza blockade
from UNICEF in 2022: The humanitarian impact of 15 years of blockade
from Amnesty International, earlier this month: Israel must lift illegal and inhumane blockade on Gaza as power plant runs out of fuel
and from that Wikipedia article:
I can’t say I ever expected to see apologia for collective punishment – an honest-to-God violation of the Geneva Convention – here on Tildes, but here we are.
I don’t care what Hamas has done when this comes into the picture, because starving and dehydrating millions of innocent people in response is unacceptable and cannot be justified. The Israeli government is and has been doing far worse to the people of Gaza than Hamas could ever even dream of doing to Israel, and yet people go to bat for them regardless. I will never understand this.
I could take other issues with this comment, but firstly, you have cause and effect backwards here. Hamas doesn't appear out of nowhere!
Alternate title: As gazans scrounge for food and water, israel sits on a treasure trove of supplies
I cant read the article cause its paywalled but yeesh is this meant to get you angry at hamas and palestinians while continuing to ignore why they would be stockpiling for war.
Here you go: https://archive.ph/j5BAk
The reporters are writing about what they were able to learn about Hamas's supplies, and your proposed headline ignores that entirely. It would be a headline for an entirely different and less interesting story.
Thank you for the link. I dont think there is any story that could be less interesting than this one though. The article spends the whole time essentially trying to convince you that militaries don't stockpile and take care of logistics before an invasion/major attack, then lightly brushes off its understanding of this fact then continues to let israelis speak about how its hamas's burden to provide the UN with fuel.
Meanwhile, my headline's story would be one about how israel spends tons of money on its PR in the west to justify collective punishment and then blame the victims.
I think you're referring to this:
And I think you're misinterpreting that? Reporting what the Israeli spokesman said doesn't make it look good. It seems callous and cynical to me. Reporters don't need to explicitly tell the reader how they should feel, and I appreciate that they didn't do that.
Also, the article doesn't try to convince you that militaries don't stockpile. The bit of historical context it gives is about how this sort of thing has happened before:
(Although, it's not a particularly sympathetic example.)
Damn, Hamas could have given the 3000+ dead children that Israel murdered some bread and water before they were exploded and buried alive. Sick of this manufactured consent, already banned on reddit despite remaining civil, but I'll continue to speak up on tildes where it's small enough that there isn't overwhelming Israeli propaganda.