it’s an odd dynamic because there have definitely been situations where Israel blocked aid, and situations where Israel facilitated more aid than is received anywhere in the entire world, even at the cost of military operations. They have an entire army division just for the logistics of aid.
It has basically gone between the two extremes the entire war, and I reckon it is the same situation in most conflicts.
Is it technically a crime? Yes. Is it the whole truth? No. The difficult part here is that prosecuting Israel for *sometimes* blocking aid will basically cause them to give up on facilitating aid entirely.
EDIT: downvote me all you want, it doesn’t change the truth.
And he was factually right to do so. How is this still disputed?
The memos Blinken was receiving explicitly said famine was inevitable because of Israel blocking aid.
Famine literally did not happen and the IPC review found that previous accounting to make a determination was undercounted massively in terms of the food people were receiving.
Maybe one can make the argument that weapons to Israel should have been blocked because it was what all the “experts” were claiming at the time but that is different from saying the experts were right and we see the consequences now for Blinken not supposedly acting.
I believe i heard the spokesperson for the secretary general state that humanitarian aid convoys aren’t supposed to be armed out of principle.
So genuinely, what is stopping Hamas from pillaging the aid trucks? Everyone in the UN is saying to flood Gaza with aid but how are we supposed to make sure that the people actually get it instead of it being horded in some warehouse by hamas while the rest starves?
3 comments
it’s an odd dynamic because there have definitely been situations where Israel blocked aid, and situations where Israel facilitated more aid than is received anywhere in the entire world, even at the cost of military operations. They have an entire army division just for the logistics of aid.
It has basically gone between the two extremes the entire war, and I reckon it is the same situation in most conflicts.
Is it technically a crime? Yes. Is it the whole truth? No. The difficult part here is that prosecuting Israel for *sometimes* blocking aid will basically cause them to give up on facilitating aid entirely.
EDIT: downvote me all you want, it doesn’t change the truth.
And he was factually right to do so. How is this still disputed?
The memos Blinken was receiving explicitly said famine was inevitable because of Israel blocking aid.
Famine literally did not happen and the IPC review found that previous accounting to make a determination was undercounted massively in terms of the food people were receiving.
Maybe one can make the argument that weapons to Israel should have been blocked because it was what all the “experts” were claiming at the time but that is different from saying the experts were right and we see the consequences now for Blinken not supposedly acting.
I believe i heard the spokesperson for the secretary general state that humanitarian aid convoys aren’t supposed to be armed out of principle.
So genuinely, what is stopping Hamas from pillaging the aid trucks? Everyone in the UN is saying to flood Gaza with aid but how are we supposed to make sure that the people actually get it instead of it being horded in some warehouse by hamas while the rest starves?