Is the UN official saying that the pier is enabling the Israeli invasion of Rafah, as though it wouldn’t happen otherwise? Or is he saying that but for the pier, Israel will open more land crossing to aid?
And what is the corrective action? Should the pier be built somewhere else, or not at all? Are their any factors about where to locate the pier besides political? Like the depth of the water or existing infrastructure?
And if the problem with the aid is that it’s a meaningless PR gesture, then does PR medicine not heal? Dose PR food not nourish?
Please help me understand why delivering food and medicine to Gaza is bad.
The UN officials aren’t saying any of those things. Here’s a tldr of the issue
The platform is meant to be in Northern Gaza where the worst of the starvation is
Israel wants it to be moved south to an Israeli choke point
Israel is about to close the crossings in South Gaza so it can attack Rafah
If the tiny amount of aid that can come in is able to be diverted to South Gaza then Israel may face less international condemnation over this phase of the Gaza genocide.
Please help me understand why delivering food and medicine to Gaza is bad.
If there is a starving child and you can choose to deliver them the nutrients they need but instead you choose to give them half a peanut instead, in a really theatrical way, that’s obviously bad right?
At no point was a pier planned for north Gaza, the first place to be evacuated, six months ago.
Israel will be inspecting every delivery since Hamas has proved again and again that if it takes part in international commerce, it will be in the business of killing Jews. That’s why they didn’t have their own port to begin with. It’s not a choke point, it’s a highway interchange. That’s generally where you want to build the port. It’s literally the opposite of a choke point.
Egypt is in charge of the southern border crossing not Israel. Egypt doesn’t want terrorists moving weapons and fighters over its border, either.
We are all familiar with the genocidaires’ explanations/pretexts for why they are blockading humanitarian aid, thanks, you don’t need to rehash them here.
Egypt doesn’t want terrorists
More to the point Egypt doesn’t want to give Israel a pretext for constant drone strikes in Egyptian territory now that every Palestinian refugee child is supposedly “Hamas”.
But either side can close a border, that’s intrinsic to borders.
Is this post about delivering aid being bad or does the title and article clearly state that this is a distraction tactic? Please help me understand your thought process of questioning things the article clearly answers.
Is the UN official saying that the pier is enabling the Israeli invasion of Rafah, as though it wouldn’t happen otherwise? Or is he saying that but for the pier, Israel will open more land crossing to aid?
And what is the corrective action? Should the pier be built somewhere else, or not at all? Are their any factors about where to locate the pier besides political? Like the depth of the water or existing infrastructure?
And if the problem with the aid is that it’s a meaningless PR gesture, then does PR medicine not heal? Dose PR food not nourish?
Please help me understand why delivering food and medicine to Gaza is bad.
The UN officials aren’t saying any of those things. Here’s a tldr of the issue
The platform is meant to be in Northern Gaza where the worst of the starvation is
Israel wants it to be moved south to an Israeli choke point
Israel is about to close the crossings in South Gaza so it can attack Rafah
If the tiny amount of aid that can come in is able to be diverted to South Gaza then Israel may face less international condemnation over this phase of the Gaza genocide.
If there is a starving child and you can choose to deliver them the nutrients they need but instead you choose to give them half a peanut instead, in a really theatrical way, that’s obviously bad right?
That’s what’s happening here.
At no point was a pier planned for north Gaza, the first place to be evacuated, six months ago.
Israel will be inspecting every delivery since Hamas has proved again and again that if it takes part in international commerce, it will be in the business of killing Jews. That’s why they didn’t have their own port to begin with. It’s not a choke point, it’s a highway interchange. That’s generally where you want to build the port. It’s literally the opposite of a choke point.
Egypt is in charge of the southern border crossing not Israel. Egypt doesn’t want terrorists moving weapons and fighters over its border, either.
We are all familiar with the genocidaires’ explanations/pretexts for why they are blockading humanitarian aid, thanks, you don’t need to rehash them here.
More to the point Egypt doesn’t want to give Israel a pretext for constant drone strikes in Egyptian territory now that every Palestinian refugee child is supposedly “Hamas”.
But either side can close a border, that’s intrinsic to borders.
Is this post about delivering aid being bad or does the title and article clearly state that this is a distraction tactic? Please help me understand your thought process of questioning things the article clearly answers.