Human rights advocates argue that airdrops and maritime routes are an insufficient substitute to aid delivery by land.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/17490070

humanitarian organizations, many of which have been sounding alarms about the hunger crisis in Gaza for months, are not impressed. They argue that air and sea deliveries are not only an insufficient substitute for humanitarian aid delivered by land, but a dehumanizing one that acts as a distraction to the man-made barriers that have prevented more aid from getting into Gaza in the first place. “There is no good reason why aid cannot access Gaza by road today,”

  • DeceptichumEnglish
    497·
    9 months ago

    It took over 1,500 flights a day to supply West Berlin during the blockade and that’s with a comparable sized population who weren’t being murdered every day.

    A few air drops will never be sufficient.

    • wurzelgummidge@lemmy.worldEnglish
      308·
      9 months ago

      It’s not meant to be sufficient, it is meant to make Biden look like he’s doing something other than merely prolonging the slaughter by sending arms to Israel.

      • DeceptichumEnglish
        192·
        9 months ago

        Of course, and we need to call that out at every chance.

        • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          518·
          9 months ago

          Gotta call it out at every chance to delegitimize Biden so Trump wins and starts another insurrection.

          • DeceptichumEnglish
            184·
            9 months ago

            You’re right, everyone should accept shit because there’s worse. Fuck ever trying for something better.

      • mellowheat@suppo.fiEnglish
        26·
        9 months ago

        it is meant to make Biden look like he’s doing something other than merely prolonging the slaughter by sending arms to Israel.

        How does sending arms to Israel prolong the war? It should rather speed up its resolution, I would think?

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.todayEnglish
      144·
      9 months ago

      It took over 1,500 flights a day to supply West Berlin during the blockade and that’s with a comparable sized population who weren’t being murdered every day.

      Two million people took ~4,500 tons a day. The C-54 carried 10 tons, meaning that it only required 450 flights per day. Comments like yours are based on the older C-37 and / or the Easter Push where the Allies did a maximum effort run just to flex on the Soviets.

      In 2024 a C-130 Hercules has a max payload of 21 tons, over double the C-54, meaning that required flights would potentially be reduced to 225.

      Then you have to consider that Operation Vittles was also delivering COAL, something that the citizens of Gaza probably don’t need.

      200 flights a day would do it but that still doesn’t excuse Israel for preventing aid via land routes.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
        13·
        9 months ago

        Berlin was an airlift operation, not an air drop. They landed the aircraft at several airports, and directly offloaded cargo to trucks.

        AFAIK, Gaza has no operational airports, which greatly complicates the logistics of an airlift mission on the scale of Berlin.

        If we are considering this sort of mission, we’re looking at sealift, not airlift. Our historical precedence will be the Mulberry harbors set up to support the Normandy invasion.

        • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          9 months ago

          Gaza does not have any operational airports, since Israel bombed the control tower at Yasser Arafat airport in 2001 and bulldozed the runway in 2002.

    • mellowheat@suppo.fiEnglish
      23·
      9 months ago

      That was USA’s ally. They weren’t being supplied out of goodwill.

    • Land_Strider@lemmy.worldEnglish
      142·
      9 months ago

      Then bomb Israeli military and governing installations as a proper response to committing genocide?

            • fustigation769curtain@lemmy.worldEnglish
              8·
              9 months ago

              What exactly has Israel done for NATO besides make it the target of terrorist attacks?

              Israel is an albatross. We need to drop it like a bad habit.

            • Land_Strider@lemmy.worldEnglish
              6·
              9 months ago

              So it is preferable for NATO to have an associate that will bomb babies, snipe kids, level hospitals, kill old people for fun, occupy and grab land by force (a total opposite of “defensive pact”) on a continent of the world where NATO countries have no land nor a plausible place as a so called defensive organization. Israel isn’t in NATO and even has no relation to NATO except if you count NATO as combined exploitative effort of the western countries on other continents.

              • fustigation769curtain@lemmy.worldEnglish
                5·
                9 months ago

                Don’t forget how supporting Israel is literally why Osama Bin Laden carried out the 9/11 attacks.

                Supporting Israel only benefits Israelis. The rest of the world loses billions of dollars every year because of israel’s occupation.

                The only solution is for them to leave. These problems will not get solved otherwise.

    • CityPop@lemmy.todayEnglish
      49·
      9 months ago

      Fuck the pier.

      Imagine someone was setting your house on fire and another guy named Joe was handing him cash and oil to keep setting fire to your house. Joe told him to stop as he handed the guy more oil, but he didn’t so Joe promised to install a hose in the front lawn of your house that should be ready in about 3 months to help put out some of the fire.

      The US needs to stop supplying and protecting Israel first and foremost. Anything else is PR.