450
submitted 7 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

Israel’s relentless bombardment of Gaza for nearly three months has destroyed 70 percent of the homes in the besieged Palestinian enclave, according to the Government Media Office.

No further details were provided but an earlier report said more than 200 heritage and archaeological sites were destroyed in the Israeli bombardment considered the most destructive in modern history.

About 300,000 out of 439,000 homes have been destroyed in Israeli attacks, a Wall Street Journal report said. Analysing satellite imagery, the report added that the 29,000 bombs dropped on the strip have targeted residential areas, Byzantine churches, hospitals and shopping malls and all civilian infrastructure has been damaged to an extent that they cannot be repaired.

“The word ‘Gaza’ is going to go down in history along with Dresden [Germany] and other famous cities that have been bombed,” Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago who has written about the history of aerial bombing, told WSJ.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 100 points 7 months ago

Maybe I'm just getting soft, but I think it's been pretty wild to watch a government murder tens of thousands of innocents real-time.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 53 points 7 months ago

Those of us old enough to remember Rwanda have seen it before. I take issue with gov'ts who've also seen it before and still do sweet fuck all about it.

[-] stevehobbes@lemy.lol 45 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Rwanda, Serbia, Armenia, and still ongoing that everyone is ignoring, the Rohingya, Uyghurs and Sudan.

[-] Tosti@feddit.nl 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Russia is also marching 100's of thousands of their minorities and people of the Donbas to their deaths, and slaughtering Ukrainians while doing it, they are double dipping sort to say.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago

World War 2 also had a little genocide issue....

The big difference is that we were supposed to be above this shit by now after 75 years of "never again".

Instead we've once again stooped down to the same moral level with the Ubermensch trying to expand their Lebensraum shit. And Westen governments are actually supporting it.

When I saw the Uyghur camps I didn't think "we could do worse than that" was an option.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The West only cares when it affects their geo-political interests such as access to natural resources or tying up another country in never ending war.

Edit: Hit submit way too early

[-] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Russia has murdered almost 20 000 civilians, perhaps around 500 000 soldiers in total (both sides) in its mindless war in Ukraine. Not all of them innocent certainly, but I'd guess at least 90%. And they're not even trying to protect themselves from anything.

And if you've been paying attention, this has been going for almost 2 years now. And still goes on. One best case scenario that Estonia recently presented in a report was that Russia will lose the war in 2 years. So if the rate keeps until then, we're looking at about a million deaths in total. Granted, Ukraine and Russia's combined population is a lot higher than the Gaza strip. Senseless deaths still.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 47 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as

... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

—[United Nations] Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2

Wikipedia

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] slurpeesoforion@startrek.website 41 points 7 months ago

Is there anything Israel wouldn't bomb? Just asking questions, here.

[-] xor@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago
[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 40 points 7 months ago

Making Gazans homeless stops terrorism how?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

Oh that's easy. You see they let Israeli Banks give all the loans for rebuilding. Then when the Gazans inevitably default because the IDF never left and everyone is still on food aid; they take the property back and sell it to Israelis. Then the IDF kicks them out and deports then under the color of law. Everyone pats each other on the back and they all declare mission Accomplished.

[-] Arete@lemmy.world 35 points 7 months ago

The actual figure is "70% damaged or destroyed". Not a whole lot better, but there is a huge difference between a house with some broken windows and a pile of rubble. The article shouldn't be hyperbolizing - the situation is bad enough as it is without lying to us.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 37 points 7 months ago

To be fair, if someone blew out all the glass over the floor of my house and half of a wall is gone I think I would say

"Man, they destroyed my house."

Not

"Man, my house is partially damaged"

It doesn't have to be a literal pile of rubble, significant damage is enough to warrant (re)construction. Not being sure if the pillars are going to keep holding up your house doesn't sound very appealing

Despite that I would love to see new comprehensible satalite imagery like they did for Mauriopol which according to western media would be described as "precision bombing on military targets" I guess

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 24 points 7 months ago

Israel has hit Gaza, which has an area of 141 sq miles, with 29,000 bombs. That works out to just over 205 bombs per square mile.

Just how many homes do you think only have broken windows and no major damage?

[-] cashews_best_nut@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

The ones that are buried under rubble are probably safe.

[-] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Both this comment and the reply to it are irrelevant. Bombs aren’t spread over average areas, bombs aren’t all the same power of explosive, nor can any math tell us much about the effect of the bombs.

All of that can only be done by looking at satellite or overhead footage, assessing the average damage to buildings in that area, and then generalizing each square to write off a percentage of homes as unlivable.

Like other comments have said, we have to be careful about this because I’d prefer the correct number and not the larger number.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Yerbouti@lemmy.ml 34 points 7 months ago

They are creating the next generation of "terrorists".

[-] BOFH@lemmy.ml 20 points 7 months ago

I was in the thick of it during the wars in Iraq (06-07) and Afghanistan (09-10) fighting and it was critical we avoid collateral damage to population and structures - you're absolutely right, it creates terrorists.

When things kicked off in Israel, even the US Administration, states to be careful with strikes. It's all of the hype surrounding Mossad and Israel's claim to fame when it comes to counterterrorism, I am shocked that they didn't utilize more strategic strikes and Special Forces to eliminate Hamas.

I definitely see them in a different light now.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Same here, 03/05 in Iraq and 2012 in Afghanistan. I was absolutely shocked because the place is only 7 miles wide. Their tactics are way overblown for such a small area, and then they seemed to take all the stuff we did in 2003 to mitigate civilian casualties and just toss it in the trash can.

[-] BOFH@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago

I agree with you. Tragic loss of life on both sides.

Thanks for your service.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] raynethackery@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago
[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 27 points 7 months ago

Because Boomers can't take it with them.

[-] Anti_Face_Weapon@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

They just might.

[-] SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

So why did we have to get everybody vaccinated? The boomer remover could have solved so many problems.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
450 points (94.3% liked)

World News

38147 readers
2448 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS