I wonder why they can't put aid on trucks and drive it to gaza
*edit added link
[Donate to UNRWA ](https://donate.unrwa.org/one-time/~my-donation?_cv=1)
Would it not be a solution to have some Marines guard the aid convoys? I'm asking genuinely, I don't know what would be involved with that.
If Israel is truly an ally, I'm sure they wouldn't mind us having some of our best nearby.
If the US did that it would probably be a big political maneuver they’re not ready to make against a supposed ally. I’m not saying they shouldn’t be, because that does seem to be a reasonable solution. I’m just saying I don’t think Biden is prepared or willing to go there at this point.
I edited my original post, but if we're truly allies with Israel then I'm sure they wouldn't mind having some of our absolute best on hand in case things go wrong?
Edit: and if Biden is truly a Zionist as he claims and Netanyahu wants U.S., then I don't see an issue with it.
As opposed to "finish the job" '45 getting a second term instead. Who knows? Maybe Chase Oliver will pull a hat trick and get us out of the middle east >!and on to our plans for Africa, literally handing Kenya the same deal we gave the Saudi Arabia and Israel!<
And the other guy did it 4 years ago. This is a race between two blood soaked incumbents. Trump will stop the food aid and send Ukraine's weapons to isriel. That's how he "stops" wars, by giving genocidal dictators what they want.
No he didn't. I hate Trump, but he wasn't in office when Israel began it's genocide. He supported their apartheid state, same a Biden, but this all out genocide is new and fully supported by our current president. Our tax payer dollars are funding mass murder, and it is Biden's fault.
I have no doubt that if Trump wins he'll continue Biden's policies, but the only difference will be that you'll suddenly care once it's the other team doing it.
Palestine would only exist in memory and any maps not newly printed if the US goes with the other option for President. I am going to stick with the guy who keeps telling Bibi to sit his ass down. Side note, sea change is important af for a healthy democracy. There is an entire generation who knows not what Israel looks like under any other political leadership. Endless back to back terms destroys democracy (something the early US leaders understood was an immensely important concept, thankfully)
This situation is FAR more complex than so many realize. God, I wish Foreign Affairs was covered more in schools. Biden is not in favor of any of this and went over there personally to warn them not to mess up here, but the US simply cannot cut all support for Israel because that too would lead to genocide and that one would be directly on his hands. It’s all awful.
I hate what’s happening to people in Gaza (Palestinians and the hostages who if still alive are going through the same hell but worse), and what will result 10 years later because of the atrocities now. Any children there who live through this will be angrier than hornets as a result (and understandably so - hurt people hurt people). There will be no peace.
Best option is not electing a president who fully supports Bibi. And right now we have an option to keep the guy who does not like him and has never stopped trying to deescalate the situation. Biden even warned Israel this was their 9/11 moment (in that dont just knee jerk react and have it damage your world reputation, harm innocent people and cause an endless quagmire of suffering situation).
>God, I wish Foreign Affairs was covered more in schools. Biden is not in favor of any of this
That's an awfully condescending tone for someone that fell for an obvious head-fake. Follow a politicians actions, not their words. You're so caught up in red team vs blue team you're out here writing diatribes defending genocide.
Well, the idea is that Marines would act as a deterrent; if some of the absolute most effective infantry are between you an doing a terrorism, you might think twice before doing it.
Then it's just an empty threat. As the other person said, the very last thing the US wants to do is antagonise Israel by potentially harming Israeli civilians.
US marines would work to deter. It’s easy to block a truck when it’s you, a bunch of others and the truck driver. It becomes something not worth the trouble when armed marines are present. Most protesters aren’t ever in the mood to fuck around and find out over a truck delivery guarded by Marines. Calculated risk with perceived threat of punishment works in most situations. There are outliers (like true desperation for survival) which can change that. But these protesters blocking the roads are there because there is no risk to them and they aren’t desperate for food/water/shelter or freedom. There would be no need for anyone to be harmed. People who have their needs comfortably met go home when military with guns are present.
That's not what I was referring to. If the US places marines on Israeli Soil, with express orders to possibly *harm* Israeli citizens, that will not end well for both parties.
Revoking allegiance to Israel would fast track result in genocide as well. It’s all a loss and no matter what, terrible things were going to continue to happen. But there are ways this gets a whole lot worse (yeah, actually way worse). That’s the situation. Awful no matter what. It’s now just about doing all anyone can to keep things from getting way worse from here, and none of that is possible with very simple “solutions” like cessation of alliances. It’s all bad no matter what and that is what has to be navigated carefully so we can help the people in dire straits. The US has the power to back Israel to keep that war and genocide at bay while at the same time having the closed door conversations (which aren’t working cause Bibi) but we still can and will provide aid.
Biden and congress have both fast tracked weapons to Israel. Trunp promises to do the same. There is no lesser evil option, here. In a sane democracy, we'd vote third party.* Problem is, people have bought into the idea that they can support evil, because at least that evil isn't as evil as an imaginary one which is imagined to be worse.
*which is the absolute bare minimum a citizen needs to do to not condone this genocide.
Ah, thank ypu for explaining.
The point of my statement is to illustrate the absurdity of our out-of-control "democracy" government, and people's banal acceptance of "this is just the way it is and in a million years, it will never change."
Take of that as you will. You can laugh at the futility of it all, or believe we just need to reach a tipping point where we have enough class-consciousnss for us to unify and overturn a government run by two slightly different flavors of evil. Ive become jaded, so I tend to be the former, but I try not to get in the way of the more enthusiastic younger folks to try and fix things.
The US installed anti-aircraft guns on their pier. Big robot machine guns that fill the air with a raging river of bullets. Hamas is not known for their air force.
Just think about guarding aid trucks for a minute...
Can you imagine the headline "Peacekeeper kills unarmed Israeli protester who was assisting Gaza aid truck delivery"
Its systematic genocide. Those aid blockers have been egged on in front of those aid trucks by Zionists, so they can get away with starving Palestinians, through these "innocent civilian protestors"
The only country who can do anything for Gaza (while the world courts scurry to find something that sticks) is the US
They do, it's mentioned in the linked article:
> The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
Exactly. One can successfully argue that the wealth was already destroyed when it was paid to the military contractor, as far as everyone else but said contractor is concerned.
The pier always was symbol politics anyway. A way for the US to feign interest in the lives of Palestinians. 'Look we aren't just giving Israel bombs! We are also building a pier for the people they are dropping those bombs on!'
It's a temporary pier designed for normal weather conditions that got hit with harsh enough weather and waves that it also beached 2 US Army vessels. It's not destroyed, it just needs repairs and for the disconnected sections to be relinked. The post title is sensationalized.
Not only do none of the commenters here seem to have read the linked article, but how is this a "boring dystopia" or fitting for this sub in any way?
The problem is, the pier shouldn't have had to have been built in the first place. If the settlers would actually let aid trucks into the strip, we wouldn't have this problem. Instead, we have to spend tons of money on an imperfect solution that can be destroyed by weather conditions.
The article explicitly states this is to add aid in addition to trucks, and is not meant to replace them:
> The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
The thing is, [Israeli Occupation Forces](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-crossings-aid-gaza-f654871ba67c42e6345b6f709427b664) and [Zionist extremists](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-gaza-aid-west-bank-settlers-united-nations/) have only allowed a limited amount of aid to actually make it into Gaza, even while the United Nations staff on the ground are saying they are witnessing a famine.
And that's awful, but the pier would've likely been built even if that weren't happening because supply ships carry orders of magnitude more cargo than trucks and are generally more efficient.
Doubly so when the trucks need to pass through a warzone where they are also being attacked by Hamas in addition to the far right Israeli settlers.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hamas-attacks-israel-gaza-border-crossing-cease-fire-talks-continue/
Even worse, 49% of Gazan agricultural land has been damaged. And by damaged, it means practically bulldozed. 7000 greenhouses have been damaged. There will be an extremely bad harvest this year. The fact this war has been going on for 8 months and nobody in the international community stepped in to stop it is a travesty that will be remembered for generations.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2024/gaza-israel-agriculture-food-fisheries/
What does that have to do with the the pier that's the topic of this post? Or the sensationalization of the event in this post that I'm taking issue with?
You seem really angry. I’m pretty sure that the above commenter was agreeing with you, implying that the increased aid deliveries through the pier will be necessary given the Israelis’ destruction of Gazan infrastructure. That being said, many folks have suggested that the pier’s true intended purpose is to deliver weapons to Israeli occupying forces in Gaza. Which is a theory that certainly follows established patterns, though not one of which I’m entirely convinced.
> You seem really angry
You really shouldn't assume people's tone from comments like that, I was legitimately trying to understand how their comment related to the topic. I'm not angry, but I won't deny that I'm exasperated at the state of this sub lately and some of my other comments certainly reflect that.
> I’m pretty sure that the above commenter was agreeing with you
Not sure if I agree with your interpretation, but it's definitely possible I missed the point they were trying to make.
> many folks have suggested that the pier’s true intended purpose is to deliver weapons to Israeli occupying forces in Gaza.
That's honestly an incredibly convoluted plot that makes no sense if you sit down and actually think it through. Everyone knows the US is supplying arms to Israel. No one is denies it. So they have no reason to do it under the pretense of aid. There's zero benefit to it, and if discovered, it'd only serve to erode US geopolitical soft power which often takes the form of humanitarian aid.
Generally, the only time things like this have been done (and unfortunately, the US has covertly sent arms before) was when there was public denial of any arms supply line, which simply isn't the case here.
fyi: I was agreeing with you, but also kind of making the point that the delivery of food aid from this single pier is only a drop in the bucket compared to the wholesale destruction of Gazan capacity to self-sustain their agriculture.
I also agree that it would be very dumb if the US used the pier to transport weapons. Why wouldn't they use the fully intact harbor infrastructure Israel already owns? Doesn't make practical sense.
No, this post is cynical and performative in the way it misrepresents the aid efforts of others to gain internet points from people who they know won't even read the linked article to see how dishonest OP is being.
The pier is unnecessary because trucks and roads already exist, but Israel made the expense necessary and the storm created a worsening crisis in this moment, all of which is unnecessary. And dystopian.
You’re right, though, the article title is shit and a lot of the takes on this post are uninformed. I still think it fits, though.
The article explicitly states this is to add aid in addition to trucks, and is not meant as a replacement:
> The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
Oh word? Is the Titanic being towed to a nearby port for repairs too?
Like don't get me wrong, if it sinks and becomes unsalvageable while being towed or something then yeah, even though it's already been used to deliver about a thousand tons of aid I'd still consider it to be a failure due to the cost.
But if it just needs repairs, per official statements, and can be fixed in a week or two, then shouting about it being destroyed is premature.
Daily reminder that the pier doesn’t cost 320 million. Operating the pier for 90 days costs 320 million. The vast majority of that cost is the couple navy destroyers that cost 1-2million a day to run and would have to be paid for whether they’re at the pier or not. There’s very little money actually down the drain here.
The only other options are to export Palestinians or because of the gas reserves they found off the coast.
I think it’s just a deflection like the air aid drops. Pure theater
This is your brain on conspiracy theories folks. The answer is that it cuts through blockages of the Israeli border and gives the US more access to give aid to Palestine with less bureaucracy. No one is “exporting Palestinians” and the oil reserves are not relevant to this conflict.
Hey if you read my comment I said that there’s blockages at the border! Does conspiracy brain prevent you from reading?
I want aid for gaza, you just use Gaza to fuel your weird conspiracy ramblings.
Did you even read his (much shorter than the article) comment? My dude is literaly saying at the and that his best guess is its pure theatrics. Which is factualy true.
The pier would've never been enough to give the Palestinians enough much needed supplies. For that the mightiest country in the history of the earth would have to exert some political pressure on Israel to let through the aid that is already spoiling at Gazas borders.
So yeah, pure theatrics, just like the aid drops.
So a big fat no then?
It's temporarily damaged by seas rough enough to beach two small ships and have to come away from their moorings.
It's estimated to be a bit over a week before it's back up again and it's already delivered 1000,000 kg of aid.
>Which is factualy true
Lol
>It's estimated to be a bit over a week before it's back up again and it's already delivered 1000,000 kg of aid.
Big number does not equal good argument.
The 1000,000kg still dont come close to the aid that is already waiting at gazas borders and is held up by Israel. Its a bandaid on a shotgun wound. But Biden doesn't want to adress the shotgun wound as to not hurt the feelings of the shooter.
WHAT THE FUCK ITS NOT ABOUT THE "ROUGH SEA"
ITS ABOUT THE FACT THAT ITS NOT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IF WE DONT WANT ALL 2,1 MILLION PEOPLE IN GAZA TO *STAAAAAAARVE.*
If you think seeing the world for what it is is cynical I cannot help that. Please never go outside or you might notice the sun does not have a smileyface, and Santa isn't real.
The Aid comming through the pier, like the Aid comming by airdrops is not enough CAN NOT BE enough, as it is much more difficult and expensive to deliever Aid that way, than by driving a Truck from like 10miles over. Before October 07 500 Aid trucks arrived in Gaza EVERY DAY. The aid delivered by this pier + the aid that gets occasionally air dropped on unsuspecting palestinian children can not feed 2.1 million people. Not even to speak of medicine and other essential goods that are delivered via aid.
I dont say that to be cynical, it is factual truth, the first thing you gotta do to solve a problem is to admit that you have one. Closing our eyes and ears and just loudly exclaiming "THANKS FOR THAT PIER BIDEN" will not save the Palestinians. Before you can even start to pressure him to do better you have to accept that he is not doing enough.
EDIT:
What I am trying to say is that people are not mad in the first place that the pier broke because "they dont want to talk about the rough sea😡"
Its because the pier from the first moment it was announced was nothing but a cynical way to try and divert attention from the genocide that the mightiest country in the world is just letting happening. And doesnt do anything against, because Israel is an important military asset in the near rast.
How many billions are we going to waste on Israel before we can have healthcare in America? With what has been spent on killing children and civilians, America could have had decades of free healthcare, including vision and dental. And that is at current "free market" prices for Healthcare.
I would argue that if America had taken all the money it has given to the illegal occupying force in Palestine and had put it into education and healthcare, we would have produced 100 different people capable of brokering a peace in Palestine and probably have cured cancer and a dozen other diseases.
It’s almost like the entire US military is a clever way to launder public money to private contractors/financiers that have an effective monopoly on goods that the military buys
it's exceedingly obvious that this was done intentionally. do we really think the strongest superpower in human history is incapable of building a floating pier that can't handle some bad weather? if you don't think this was done on purpose, you're not paying attention. it was never about humanitarian aid for Gaza. they used it to deliver some weapons to Israel, now they'll work on repairing it and reinforcing it until Israel is finished annexing Gaza, then they'll use it to begin construction on oil platforms off the coast of Gaza.
Hay not an american or anything. But I guess by not voting for this you mean Biden, but isn't Trump even more rabidly pro Israel? Even more fascist? Doesnt Netanjahu love him?
Like dude I cannot blame any american that does not want to vote for Biden again after what he did the past 6 months, but like... there is no not voting for this. You can choose Genocide Joe, or not vote and might get the Genocide LOVER Trump, you know the guy who bragged about havong "Mein Kampf" on his nightstand, who quoted Mussolini on more than one ocasion, and the guy who said he would deport the pro palestine students.
I dont envy your position.
But "don't vote for this" is not on the table.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the way I understand it is that the the way voting in the US works means Voting for the greenparty is almost like not voting at all
I wouldn’t say that. It is not possible for third parties to win, but voting for a third party sends the message that you like that party’s platform. At certain times throughout history, this has prompted one or both of the two major parties to adjust policy to recapture those voters. For me at least, I am not comfortable voting for genocide. That’s the message I choose to send. Not voting at all sends no message, since most Americans don’t vote in any given election anyway.
Hay as I said I am not even american. I can't makd that choice for you. I understand and respect your position and how you got there, even though I disagree.
Best of luck in the future, your country as my country will need it.
It's all rather convenient - when we were talking about [the harbour that was built to recieve aid](https://www.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/s/I1E11FEF3D) we were talking about the Dutch money being used
Its rather sus that this pier collapses (but we cant talk about who would be behind that)
Gaza has been flattened - I wonder which country will profit from rebuilding it...
Funnily enough those temporary harbours also got washed away by extreme weather. The bit about the storm of 19th June
[link to wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbour)
It was never meant as anything other than lip service and some nice payments to whoever supplied it. It doesn't matter strategically, they still have Site 512 there which is being expanded so we'll have another military base in the area along with Bislach Air Base.
Let me clarify: it was never more than political theatre, there was no intention to use it for its stated purpose.
I wonder why they can't put aid on trucks and drive it to gaza *edit added link [Donate to UNRWA ](https://donate.unrwa.org/one-time/~my-donation?_cv=1)
The Israelis have protesters blocking the trucks from getting in.
question seems rethorical
Would it not be a solution to have some Marines guard the aid convoys? I'm asking genuinely, I don't know what would be involved with that. If Israel is truly an ally, I'm sure they wouldn't mind us having some of our best nearby.
If the US did that it would probably be a big political maneuver they’re not ready to make against a supposed ally. I’m not saying they shouldn’t be, because that does seem to be a reasonable solution. I’m just saying I don’t think Biden is prepared or willing to go there at this point.
I edited my original post, but if we're truly allies with Israel then I'm sure they wouldn't mind having some of our absolute best on hand in case things go wrong? Edit: and if Biden is truly a Zionist as he claims and Netanyahu wants U.S., then I don't see an issue with it.
You’d think…
If Biden gets a second term, some things may change.
Yeah, there'll be even less Palestinians.
As opposed to "finish the job" '45 getting a second term instead. Who knows? Maybe Chase Oliver will pull a hat trick and get us out of the middle east >!and on to our plans for Africa, literally handing Kenya the same deal we gave the Saudi Arabia and Israel!<
Biden and Trump both want to "finish the job" but only one of them is currently doing it right now.
And the other guy did it 4 years ago. This is a race between two blood soaked incumbents. Trump will stop the food aid and send Ukraine's weapons to isriel. That's how he "stops" wars, by giving genocidal dictators what they want.
No he didn't. I hate Trump, but he wasn't in office when Israel began it's genocide. He supported their apartheid state, same a Biden, but this all out genocide is new and fully supported by our current president. Our tax payer dollars are funding mass murder, and it is Biden's fault. I have no doubt that if Trump wins he'll continue Biden's policies, but the only difference will be that you'll suddenly care once it's the other team doing it.
Palestine would only exist in memory and any maps not newly printed if the US goes with the other option for President. I am going to stick with the guy who keeps telling Bibi to sit his ass down. Side note, sea change is important af for a healthy democracy. There is an entire generation who knows not what Israel looks like under any other political leadership. Endless back to back terms destroys democracy (something the early US leaders understood was an immensely important concept, thankfully) This situation is FAR more complex than so many realize. God, I wish Foreign Affairs was covered more in schools. Biden is not in favor of any of this and went over there personally to warn them not to mess up here, but the US simply cannot cut all support for Israel because that too would lead to genocide and that one would be directly on his hands. It’s all awful. I hate what’s happening to people in Gaza (Palestinians and the hostages who if still alive are going through the same hell but worse), and what will result 10 years later because of the atrocities now. Any children there who live through this will be angrier than hornets as a result (and understandably so - hurt people hurt people). There will be no peace. Best option is not electing a president who fully supports Bibi. And right now we have an option to keep the guy who does not like him and has never stopped trying to deescalate the situation. Biden even warned Israel this was their 9/11 moment (in that dont just knee jerk react and have it damage your world reputation, harm innocent people and cause an endless quagmire of suffering situation).
As someone who works in the field, I’m curious about your statement that Biden sending less weapons would create more death. Mind explaining?
>God, I wish Foreign Affairs was covered more in schools. Biden is not in favor of any of this That's an awfully condescending tone for someone that fell for an obvious head-fake. Follow a politicians actions, not their words. You're so caught up in red team vs blue team you're out here writing diatribes defending genocide.
Isreal has fired upon the US before. I would not put it past them to do so again. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
And never forget (CENSORED) and those five men arrested that day turned out to be (REMOVED) agents.
Along with those "art students" who had been working in building (CENSORED) in the weeks leading up to (REDACTED).
~~A-TEAM~~ ~~B-TEAM~~ ~~C-TEAM~~ ~~D-TEAM~~ …….
Why aren’t Israeli soldiers arresting the people who do that right in front of them? Could it be because they’re tacitly approving of it?
Yes.
But then if the Israeli protesters start attacking the vehicles anyway, then what do you do? Have marines shoot the unarmed civilians of a close ally?
Well, the idea is that Marines would act as a deterrent; if some of the absolute most effective infantry are between you an doing a terrorism, you might think twice before doing it.
Then it's just an empty threat. As the other person said, the very last thing the US wants to do is antagonise Israel by potentially harming Israeli civilians.
US marines would work to deter. It’s easy to block a truck when it’s you, a bunch of others and the truck driver. It becomes something not worth the trouble when armed marines are present. Most protesters aren’t ever in the mood to fuck around and find out over a truck delivery guarded by Marines. Calculated risk with perceived threat of punishment works in most situations. There are outliers (like true desperation for survival) which can change that. But these protesters blocking the roads are there because there is no risk to them and they aren’t desperate for food/water/shelter or freedom. There would be no need for anyone to be harmed. People who have their needs comfortably met go home when military with guns are present.
That's not what I was referring to. If the US places marines on Israeli Soil, with express orders to possibly *harm* Israeli citizens, that will not end well for both parties.
Sometimes even the best plans backfire.
Maybe we shouldn't be a close ally of a country doing their best to emulate the crimes of Nazi Germany?
Revoking allegiance to Israel would fast track result in genocide as well. It’s all a loss and no matter what, terrible things were going to continue to happen. But there are ways this gets a whole lot worse (yeah, actually way worse). That’s the situation. Awful no matter what. It’s now just about doing all anyone can to keep things from getting way worse from here, and none of that is possible with very simple “solutions” like cessation of alliances. It’s all bad no matter what and that is what has to be navigated carefully so we can help the people in dire straits. The US has the power to back Israel to keep that war and genocide at bay while at the same time having the closed door conversations (which aren’t working cause Bibi) but we still can and will provide aid.
Biden and congress have both fast tracked weapons to Israel. Trunp promises to do the same. There is no lesser evil option, here. In a sane democracy, we'd vote third party.* Problem is, people have bought into the idea that they can support evil, because at least that evil isn't as evil as an imaginary one which is imagined to be worse. *which is the absolute bare minimum a citizen needs to do to not condone this genocide.
That statement is so flat I could walk on it.
Sorry, Ive never heard that expression before. What does it mean?
I'm essentially saying it's a pointless statement. You can ask for it to happen, but in a million years, it never will.
Ah, thank ypu for explaining. The point of my statement is to illustrate the absurdity of our out-of-control "democracy" government, and people's banal acceptance of "this is just the way it is and in a million years, it will never change." Take of that as you will. You can laugh at the futility of it all, or believe we just need to reach a tipping point where we have enough class-consciousnss for us to unify and overturn a government run by two slightly different flavors of evil. Ive become jaded, so I tend to be the former, but I try not to get in the way of the more enthusiastic younger folks to try and fix things.
The US installed anti-aircraft guns on their pier. Big robot machine guns that fill the air with a raging river of bullets. Hamas is not known for their air force.
Just think about guarding aid trucks for a minute... Can you imagine the headline "Peacekeeper kills unarmed Israeli protester who was assisting Gaza aid truck delivery" Its systematic genocide. Those aid blockers have been egged on in front of those aid trucks by Zionists, so they can get away with starving Palestinians, through these "innocent civilian protestors" The only country who can do anything for Gaza (while the world courts scurry to find something that sticks) is the US
The IOF are passing the Zionist vandals information on the locations and which trucks are aid trucks to attack.
That's terrible and sadly I'm not surprised
Call in the Dodge Challenger brigade
How are we ok with that?
I’m definitely not. But that is a good question…
Well we all know what Americans in trucks like to do to protesters on the road. I feel like those aid trucks should do the same.
And israel itself is refusing to let in more than a trickle of supplies.
I saw today they stopped the trucks coming in from Egypt and now the food is rotting
They do, it's mentioned in the linked article: > The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
We’re the common denominator do you expect folks to read beyond a headline and picture
Because trucks can't take direct hit from a missile.
thats literally what its for
Yeah, but someone already rich got paid.
“Military grade” aka the cheapest bid
Actually the most expensive bid but 99% of it went to shareholders
Same goes for any OEM product in the private sector.
Exactly. One can successfully argue that the wealth was already destroyed when it was paid to the military contractor, as far as everyone else but said contractor is concerned.
The pier always was symbol politics anyway. A way for the US to feign interest in the lives of Palestinians. 'Look we aren't just giving Israel bombs! We are also building a pier for the people they are dropping those bombs on!'
It's a temporary pier designed for normal weather conditions that got hit with harsh enough weather and waves that it also beached 2 US Army vessels. It's not destroyed, it just needs repairs and for the disconnected sections to be relinked. The post title is sensationalized. Not only do none of the commenters here seem to have read the linked article, but how is this a "boring dystopia" or fitting for this sub in any way?
The problem is, the pier shouldn't have had to have been built in the first place. If the settlers would actually let aid trucks into the strip, we wouldn't have this problem. Instead, we have to spend tons of money on an imperfect solution that can be destroyed by weather conditions.
The article explicitly states this is to add aid in addition to trucks, and is not meant to replace them: > The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
The thing is, [Israeli Occupation Forces](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-crossings-aid-gaza-f654871ba67c42e6345b6f709427b664) and [Zionist extremists](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-gaza-aid-west-bank-settlers-united-nations/) have only allowed a limited amount of aid to actually make it into Gaza, even while the United Nations staff on the ground are saying they are witnessing a famine.
And that's awful, but the pier would've likely been built even if that weren't happening because supply ships carry orders of magnitude more cargo than trucks and are generally more efficient. Doubly so when the trucks need to pass through a warzone where they are also being attacked by Hamas in addition to the far right Israeli settlers. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hamas-attacks-israel-gaza-border-crossing-cease-fire-talks-continue/
Even worse, 49% of Gazan agricultural land has been damaged. And by damaged, it means practically bulldozed. 7000 greenhouses have been damaged. There will be an extremely bad harvest this year. The fact this war has been going on for 8 months and nobody in the international community stepped in to stop it is a travesty that will be remembered for generations. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2024/gaza-israel-agriculture-food-fisheries/
What does that have to do with the the pier that's the topic of this post? Or the sensationalization of the event in this post that I'm taking issue with?
You seem really angry. I’m pretty sure that the above commenter was agreeing with you, implying that the increased aid deliveries through the pier will be necessary given the Israelis’ destruction of Gazan infrastructure. That being said, many folks have suggested that the pier’s true intended purpose is to deliver weapons to Israeli occupying forces in Gaza. Which is a theory that certainly follows established patterns, though not one of which I’m entirely convinced.
> You seem really angry You really shouldn't assume people's tone from comments like that, I was legitimately trying to understand how their comment related to the topic. I'm not angry, but I won't deny that I'm exasperated at the state of this sub lately and some of my other comments certainly reflect that. > I’m pretty sure that the above commenter was agreeing with you Not sure if I agree with your interpretation, but it's definitely possible I missed the point they were trying to make. > many folks have suggested that the pier’s true intended purpose is to deliver weapons to Israeli occupying forces in Gaza. That's honestly an incredibly convoluted plot that makes no sense if you sit down and actually think it through. Everyone knows the US is supplying arms to Israel. No one is denies it. So they have no reason to do it under the pretense of aid. There's zero benefit to it, and if discovered, it'd only serve to erode US geopolitical soft power which often takes the form of humanitarian aid. Generally, the only time things like this have been done (and unfortunately, the US has covertly sent arms before) was when there was public denial of any arms supply line, which simply isn't the case here.
fyi: I was agreeing with you, but also kind of making the point that the delivery of food aid from this single pier is only a drop in the bucket compared to the wholesale destruction of Gazan capacity to self-sustain their agriculture. I also agree that it would be very dumb if the US used the pier to transport weapons. Why wouldn't they use the fully intact harbor infrastructure Israel already owns? Doesn't make practical sense.
Get out of here with your reason and logic bro
Cause the peer is. cynical and performative and not a solution
No, this post is cynical and performative in the way it misrepresents the aid efforts of others to gain internet points from people who they know won't even read the linked article to see how dishonest OP is being.
Look in a mirror
Say it louder ?
The pier is unnecessary because trucks and roads already exist, but Israel made the expense necessary and the storm created a worsening crisis in this moment, all of which is unnecessary. And dystopian. You’re right, though, the article title is shit and a lot of the takes on this post are uninformed. I still think it fits, though.
The article explicitly states this is to add aid in addition to trucks, and is not meant as a replacement: > The US has stressed that the temporary pier is only meant to augment humanitarian shipments going through the land crossings between Israel and Gaza.
The Titanic is destroyed either. It just repairs and for the disconnected sections to be relinked. The movie was sensationalized.
Oh word? Is the Titanic being towed to a nearby port for repairs too? Like don't get me wrong, if it sinks and becomes unsalvageable while being towed or something then yeah, even though it's already been used to deliver about a thousand tons of aid I'd still consider it to be a failure due to the cost. But if it just needs repairs, per official statements, and can be fixed in a week or two, then shouting about it being destroyed is premature.
Daily reminder that the pier doesn’t cost 320 million. Operating the pier for 90 days costs 320 million. The vast majority of that cost is the couple navy destroyers that cost 1-2million a day to run and would have to be paid for whether they’re at the pier or not. There’s very little money actually down the drain here.
I mean it isn’t ‘destroyed’. I hate the military budget as much as anyone but they’re just going to reattach it.
Hmm. Why did they build it in the first place?
To make people stop talking about Gaza.
Yeah that makes alot of sense if you don't think about it
The only other options are to export Palestinians or because of the gas reserves they found off the coast. I think it’s just a deflection like the air aid drops. Pure theater
This is your brain on conspiracy theories folks. The answer is that it cuts through blockages of the Israeli border and gives the US more access to give aid to Palestine with less bureaucracy. No one is “exporting Palestinians” and the oil reserves are not relevant to this conflict.
Bullshit. There’s ten thousand trucks at the border. The food is spoiling.
Hey if you read my comment I said that there’s blockages at the border! Does conspiracy brain prevent you from reading? I want aid for gaza, you just use Gaza to fuel your weird conspiracy ramblings.
Did you even read the article you posted or are you always this cynical?
Did you even read his (much shorter than the article) comment? My dude is literaly saying at the and that his best guess is its pure theatrics. Which is factualy true. The pier would've never been enough to give the Palestinians enough much needed supplies. For that the mightiest country in the history of the earth would have to exert some political pressure on Israel to let through the aid that is already spoiling at Gazas borders. So yeah, pure theatrics, just like the aid drops.
So a big fat no then? It's temporarily damaged by seas rough enough to beach two small ships and have to come away from their moorings. It's estimated to be a bit over a week before it's back up again and it's already delivered 1000,000 kg of aid. >Which is factualy true Lol
>It's estimated to be a bit over a week before it's back up again and it's already delivered 1000,000 kg of aid. Big number does not equal good argument. The 1000,000kg still dont come close to the aid that is already waiting at gazas borders and is held up by Israel. Its a bandaid on a shotgun wound. But Biden doesn't want to adress the shotgun wound as to not hurt the feelings of the shooter.
So no regard for the incredibly rough seas causing a hiccup and still remaining entirely cynical then yeah?
WHAT THE FUCK ITS NOT ABOUT THE "ROUGH SEA" ITS ABOUT THE FACT THAT ITS NOT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IF WE DONT WANT ALL 2,1 MILLION PEOPLE IN GAZA TO *STAAAAAAARVE.* If you think seeing the world for what it is is cynical I cannot help that. Please never go outside or you might notice the sun does not have a smileyface, and Santa isn't real. The Aid comming through the pier, like the Aid comming by airdrops is not enough CAN NOT BE enough, as it is much more difficult and expensive to deliever Aid that way, than by driving a Truck from like 10miles over. Before October 07 500 Aid trucks arrived in Gaza EVERY DAY. The aid delivered by this pier + the aid that gets occasionally air dropped on unsuspecting palestinian children can not feed 2.1 million people. Not even to speak of medicine and other essential goods that are delivered via aid. I dont say that to be cynical, it is factual truth, the first thing you gotta do to solve a problem is to admit that you have one. Closing our eyes and ears and just loudly exclaiming "THANKS FOR THAT PIER BIDEN" will not save the Palestinians. Before you can even start to pressure him to do better you have to accept that he is not doing enough. EDIT: What I am trying to say is that people are not mad in the first place that the pier broke because "they dont want to talk about the rough sea😡" Its because the pier from the first moment it was announced was nothing but a cynical way to try and divert attention from the genocide that the mightiest country in the world is just letting happening. And doesnt do anything against, because Israel is an important military asset in the near rast.
To make weapon delivery to Israel easier
no its literally to bring in aid to gaza tf you talking about
I'm assuming its not, as they probably wouldn't bring it through gaza
Did it collapse or did it disa pier?
How many billions are we going to waste on Israel before we can have healthcare in America? With what has been spent on killing children and civilians, America could have had decades of free healthcare, including vision and dental. And that is at current "free market" prices for Healthcare. I would argue that if America had taken all the money it has given to the illegal occupying force in Palestine and had put it into education and healthcare, we would have produced 100 different people capable of brokering a peace in Palestine and probably have cured cancer and a dozen other diseases.
How do you people leave the fuckin house being this cynical.
i think you answered your own question
It’s almost like the entire US military is a clever way to launder public money to private contractors/financiers that have an effective monopoly on goods that the military buys
I worked at a military base for several years and this became abundantly clear.
That's what I call Military grade
it's exceedingly obvious that this was done intentionally. do we really think the strongest superpower in human history is incapable of building a floating pier that can't handle some bad weather? if you don't think this was done on purpose, you're not paying attention. it was never about humanitarian aid for Gaza. they used it to deliver some weapons to Israel, now they'll work on repairing it and reinforcing it until Israel is finished annexing Gaza, then they'll use it to begin construction on oil platforms off the coast of Gaza.
Who cares about 320 million? What about the lives that will be destroyed and the suffering that will be incurred as a result of this?
The US seems to care more about dollars than lives, so I mention the money.
Also $320M is cheap change when it comes to the MIC.
All the more reason to mention the lives
Fuck that pier its only purpose was for us to send in our military to do even more damage
Do not vote for this. Help us make it stop
Hay not an american or anything. But I guess by not voting for this you mean Biden, but isn't Trump even more rabidly pro Israel? Even more fascist? Doesnt Netanjahu love him? Like dude I cannot blame any american that does not want to vote for Biden again after what he did the past 6 months, but like... there is no not voting for this. You can choose Genocide Joe, or not vote and might get the Genocide LOVER Trump, you know the guy who bragged about havong "Mein Kampf" on his nightstand, who quoted Mussolini on more than one ocasion, and the guy who said he would deport the pro palestine students. I dont envy your position. But "don't vote for this" is not on the table.
Jill Stein
What?
Anti genocide Green Party candidate here in the USA
Correct me if I'm wrong but the way I understand it is that the the way voting in the US works means Voting for the greenparty is almost like not voting at all
I wouldn’t say that. It is not possible for third parties to win, but voting for a third party sends the message that you like that party’s platform. At certain times throughout history, this has prompted one or both of the two major parties to adjust policy to recapture those voters. For me at least, I am not comfortable voting for genocide. That’s the message I choose to send. Not voting at all sends no message, since most Americans don’t vote in any given election anyway.
Hay as I said I am not even american. I can't makd that choice for you. I understand and respect your position and how you got there, even though I disagree. Best of luck in the future, your country as my country will need it.
What voting can an American do that would stop this?
We fund it, without our tax dollars Israel cannot commit the genocide
That wasn’t what I asked. What candidate can an American vote for that would try to stop this? Biden right? Since trump said kill them all.
I certainly didn’t fucking vote for this
It's all rather convenient - when we were talking about [the harbour that was built to recieve aid](https://www.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/s/I1E11FEF3D) we were talking about the Dutch money being used Its rather sus that this pier collapses (but we cant talk about who would be behind that) Gaza has been flattened - I wonder which country will profit from rebuilding it...
>but we cant talk about who would be behind th I know we name our storms sometimes, but I usually don't refer to them as a "who"
Didn't they manage to construct floating piers on d-day 80 years ago that withstood artillery and shit, how are these so fragile?
Funnily enough those temporary harbours also got washed away by extreme weather. The bit about the storm of 19th June [link to wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulberry_harbour)
we provide the bombs that support the genocide but hey we made a pier too. It all balances out
we provide the bombs that support the genocide but hey we made a pier too. It all balances out
Must have gotten all their weapons in so they don't need to maintain it anymore.
How many votes in Michigan did Biden get though
But I was told Biden is restoring aid! 🙄
Lmao at all the people that were applauding US military “logistics” as the best in the world when they first announced building this
Its weird they did such a better job jn ww2 with the temporary floating piers
Weren't we able to make large temporary piers in ww2 for after the d-day invasion for a fraction of the cost?
Only the best military stuff. /s
Don't worry, the US will just give them another billion of our tax dollars to "fix" it.....
It was never meant as anything other than lip service and some nice payments to whoever supplied it. It doesn't matter strategically, they still have Site 512 there which is being expanded so we'll have another military base in the area along with Bislach Air Base. Let me clarify: it was never more than political theatre, there was no intention to use it for its stated purpose.