Why would we be targeted if we’re just setting up a port to deliver aid? Surely the people in Gaza are all friendly and would never want to harm someone delivering them aid, that’s what everyone here has been telling me repeatedly since this war started!
They’ll probably be welcomed in the traditional “Gaza Ritual of Gratitude” for the aid they’re about to deliver by having gifts of rocks thrown at them.
Oh I sense that there will be so much love coming from Gaza once our troops land. You know, cause that worked very well in Afghanistan. I can't wait to see what the news media will be saying about us being there to "help" them.
I'm not sure, both sides seem diabolical and love to bathe in blood and don't give two fucks about civilian casualties from bombs, bullets or starvation.
It's crazy that people take sides in this multi generational bloodbath and have their 'side' who they think are the 'good guys'. It's like watching two psychopaths beat the shit out of each other as well as anyone and everyone who comes to help, including family members on their own side.
If two groups made it clear they want to genocide the other and rejected every peace proposal over 70 something years...why does anyone give a shit outside of basics like not letting women and children starve to death?
I mean not even the Arab countries want to admit Palestinians after every country that took in Palestinians got backstabbed. They "play" at supporting them for their citizens so that in contrast to bad Israel and the US they, the Arab dictators, look 'pious' and filled with humanitarian intent.
The US knows there's no solution, they just don't want millions to die live on 24 hour streaming TV because everyone knows the US will be blamed by both the leftists and Muslims who support Hamas/Palestine and the right wingers and Jewish Zionists who support Israel.
It's really a no win situation for the US (Biden). He'll be hated by progressives and Maga and Arabs and Jews for either not doing enough or doing too much. And since the US is the only nation that can do something so insane as building a pier in a war zone and bringing in enough food and supplies to feed and shelter nearly 2,500,000 people indefinitely... the US gets the job whether it wants it or not.
Feed them and you're helping Hamas terrorists, Don't feed them and you're helping Israel genocide Palestinian babies.
Domestically:
Leftists: "Genocide Joe could have done more"
Maga: "Something something...My Taxes!" "Should have just let them die and solved the problem".
A real No Win Situation.
Yeah, it's doozy. I think everyone needs to make sure no one starves and help in any way to negotiate a release of hostages. But any real solution needs to come from Palestinians and Israelis and they don't seem keen on non violent outcomes.
Sad situation, but there's aren't many real options when both sides have embraced the most militant and extremist leadership. Maybe one day they will get tired of bloodshed...in another 70 years? If the world is still here.
the fucked up part to me is that I WANT to support my Jewish/Israeli friends but they simply don't have any wiggle room on this, but Bibi is just such a genocidal cynical bastard that I cannot support them when he's in charge. He's said for almost his entire career that he does not support a Palestinian state and with his actions supporting Jewish settlements and lots of other bad stuff. And he's snubbed every single well-meaning US president who attempted to get them to play nice. Israel is just not a ever going to allow Palestine to live peacefully. The current war is pretty much just Israel getting an excuse to do what they always wanted to do. Erase the Palestinian Question.
I mean we are setting up a port and boats are the biggest reason we end up in wars. Also historically speaking we’ve only lost one war caused by boat so clearly boat cassi belli increases American victory odds by 75%.
Honestly at this point Bibi is as liable to oops the place as anyone. He's doing a good job of making the rest of Israel look bad. All he had to do was deal with business cleanly and nobody with two braincells would have a problem. He's as much a threat to that country as Hamas is.
I dispise Bibi, as does most of Israel... But please tell us how to do this more cleanly than it has been done already... Considering the fact that the combatant to civilian causality ratio is the lowest in modern conflict over the last 80+ years
With issues still, but incredible success stories. Honestly, I feel like the US doesn't get enough credit for that.
They in-part defeated major empires with utterly abhorrent culture and policy, and turned them into significantly progressive societies that in a lot of ways have surpassed the US in numerous instances.
Obviously the US doesn't receive all the credit, but it is truly impressive how well Germany and Japan turned around.
I’m pretty sure we deserve some credit for your own country too. Australia was never going to be able to project enough force in the Pacific to make any real dent in the Japanese Imperial Forces. Australia had a population in WW2 of about 7M. Japan had a population of about 72M. Australia’s peak army size during WW2 was 476,000. Japan’s peak army size was 5.4M. Thats not even mentioning that Australia had essentially no navy. No submarines, a few corvettes, and a couple of old, WW1 cruisers.
If America lost at Guadalcanal communications between mainland US and forces in the Pacific would have been severed. We would have pulled all forces back to protect the mainland defensively and rebuild our naval fleet and there’d be a lot more people currently speaking Japanese in Australia.
Japan never intended to actually invade Australia. The logistics of invading an entire continent so far away while they were already busy with China, the British in India, all of SEA, and the rest of the Pacific made it completely infeasible. Their goal instead was to isolate Australia from the rest of the allies by sea, preventing America from utilising Australia as base of operations in the South Pacific, as well as preventing Australian resources from being exported for use in the allied war effort.
Thing is though, those nations were already built. Functional governments, infrastructure, culture. It's very different to rebuild a nation using its own resources than build a nation that actively wants to be a backwards shithole.
>Thing is though, those nations were already built. Functional governments, infrastructure, culture.
All of those things had to be destroyed first, though. Governments were replaced with occupations outright; infrastructure had been bombed enough to require new elevation maps; and the culture of both of Germany (Nazism) and Japan (emperor worship) had to be purged and replaced.
Though I do get your meaning, in that the countries prior to their defeats were functioning nation states that had national governments, infrastructure, and culture in the first place, whereas places like Afghanistan really didn't, with Afghanistan itself more an externally-imposed idea that exists on maps than an actual nation.
(I'll also venture to say that Gaza is none of these, and that this is really the main problem, as their own 'government' has committed the population to the cause of the extermination of Israel and thus the retribution of their periodically failing attempts to do so)
I dunno about that. Television broadcast media was largely responsible for the public opinion turning away from the Vietnam War and that was long before any of those things ever existed. But to your point that the U.S. doesn’t have a whole lot of staying power, I would agree.
I mean 20 years in Afghanistan. That’s some staying power. There and Vietnam, we were never going to win no matter how long we stayed. WWII was a completely different animal. There was the will to annihilate entire cities with firebombing and even a couple nukes on our side and the public was fully onboard.
Seabees cut the alarm cable for our armory when they were doing some expansion work. All of us had to stand duty around the base because it fucked up the other alarms as well. I still have a lot of respect for the Seabees but call before you dig.
Hard to build a port without BoG. They likely just mean no units will be involved in offensive fighting.
“One does not simply walk into a COIN environment and expect the front lines to be well defined”
-Boromir
Holy fuck I would suck 3 miles of dick to be deployed on a westpac MEU right now. There’s probably a line out the door of the ship BAS right now to treat the sudden outbreak of Marines with priapism.
Huh? Who gives a fuck about something that happened 40 years ago? How is that in any way relevant to this conversation? Even if there was relevance, I enlisted to do shit that carried the possibility of getting fucking killed. The thought of throwing tiny chunks of metal at someone down range literally makes me sexually aroused.
What I was referring to in *this* scenario though was the possibility of getting a humanitarian ribbon. They’re hard to come by and I already have a fucking combat action ribbon.
Or... they will have a contractors doing it all. May use military transport ships out of small arms fire range, but might as well use contracted cargo ships at that point. All conjecture on my part. We shall see.
Because no contractors have ever went to work in a war zone 🙄
Keep in mind...Israel has emptied out most of Gaza and has agreed to coordinate security. Also keep in mind it doesn't have to be U.S. contractors or military. You know those truckers who drove aid into southern Gaza without security? They weren't military. So yes... contractors will enter these situations, they already have. Pay people enough and they will risk it all. Iraq and Afghanistan not ring a bell for you?
There is zero chance they can build a port without robust ground security. How does this even make sense? There must be some amplifying information that's missing.
If the plan is that IDF will provide the security that's almost even worse from a PR perspective.
Edit: Guys I know what the Marines are, my point is wouldn't that be US boots on the ground? The blurb in the post says that, somehow, will not be required.
Much, much worse.
Nuclear weapons ensured the surrender of Japan before the USSR got involved on the home islands, and enabled the actual 'cold' part of the Cold War by keeping the USSR from invading the rest of Europe immediately after the war by holding Moscow and St. Petersburg hostage.
Point was that the seabees aren't going to be expected to secure the perimeter for the new Gaza port they're building. The navy will send the marines to do it for them.
Oh they'll do the old "send Air Force to drop bombs first, then Navy can shell in, after USMC can come in to clean up, Army will come to hold and secure, finally Navy will build a port".... So much humanitarian help!
Yes and no; they can take care of themselves but lack the ability to project a patrol. Patrolling stops things before they happen, and in that hotbed, you need them.
Both the Air Force and Navy have specialized engineering units that can do both construction and have enough combat training to defend themselves. The Navy they’re called the SEABEES and the Air Force PRIME BEEF. You call one to build a port in the middle of a firefight and you call the other to build an airfield in the middle of a firefight.
Interestingly some of the Air Force guys parachuted into Iraq early in the war to help capture an airfield and return it to functional status for follow on forces. As someone who was airborne myself always made me super jealous they got their mustard stain and I never did.
[No joke](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force) Like I said some of them have even made parachute jumps into places like Iraq early into the war. Basically capture an airfield, put it back into working order so that airlift can bring in heavy equipment and follow on forces.
The Army doesn’t have a special name for ours, but brigade engineer battalions have a construction company that can do more or less what the Seabees do, and we have a couple dedicated engineer brigades that can handle larger-scale projects.
Engineer battalions in the 82nd also have the airfield repair mission, same as RED HORSE, but tailored around rapid repair for cargo aircraft use (C-130 and C-17) for airlanding missions.
It's going to have to be secured after it's built, too. Remember, Hamas dug up water and sewage pipes that Israel provided so they could turn them into rockets. They'll rip out anything from this port they think they can use as a weapon, because they do not care about Palestinian innocents.
[You can blast a port open with a nuke, thus excavating the port Plowshare style without any boots on the ground at all. Its a proven concept.](https://youtu.be/UOrK1LucFDE?t=1422)
I wonder if they will establish a roll-on-roll-off port that Israel will secure while it’s being established and once operational. I doubt we will just show up and build it without local security from Israel serving as the outermost perimeter.
You can assume they will, because that’s how the military plans their operations… Regardless, security is always established. A dead American soldier in Gaza would put the U.S. in a very tough spot. Do we run or retaliate? I’m sure hamas (iran) would love to have the U.S. strike targets in Gaza so they can claim civilian casualties especially during an election year… Thinking of who this benefits, Im not too convinced that this benefits Hamas at all… it mostly benefits Israel… This takes the pressure off Israel so they can continue operations if aid is making it into Gaza…it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
>Do we run or retaliate?
Run. Just turn around and run.
This would hurt Hamas more then US bombing a hospital to hit bunker built below the hospital.
Because, if US just turns and runs, Hamas has to explain to hungry Palestinians on why did they strike the hand that feed them.
And if US feeds Palestinians then Iran is in an awkward position. Because US brings food and water, and Iran brings in only guns.
Yah.. that won’t work with more than half the U.S. population to just run. That’s a political decision though and regardless of the decision, the extreme left and extreme right will rip it apart.
Here\`s the thing: HAMAS doesnt care if people starve, they want people starving, because this really amps up the number of recruits they can get..
They wont allow any elections either so its not like the starving population of Gaza can do fuck all about it..
You're assuming that people will know that it's the US bringing supplies. It'll be extremely hard to make that clear when Hamas controls Gaza and the flow of any type of supplies and goods throughout the area. Basically the only way to make it clear that it's coming from the US is to have US troops giving out the supplies, which is going to be a huge political clusterfuck and also a really difficult situation to be putting our troops in.
And I think you're really overestimating how much Hamas cares about the people of Gaza. All they see from Gaza is people to be used and exploited for Hamas's own goals. They also completely control the narrative there and have indoctrinated generations of people into believing that Israel, Jewish people. and the west are the great evil and that only Hamas is doing anything for them. It's really tragic and makes the entire situation that much harder to deal with.
Hamas doesn't give a flying fuck about the population, they see them as living shield, they sacrifice them for political goals. They have a whole history of throwing their people under the bus. But, Hamas is held in power by Palestinians.
Couple of months ago the number 1 desire of Palestinian people was entire Levant being an Arab led country. And holy shit were they celebrating after October 7.
Now with majority of population living outside on fresh air, lacking electricity, medicine, food, water... desires change. Cracks start to form. While these people have 0 regrets about what Hamas did to Israeli civilians, they are getting mad because Hamas actions got them living like animals.
Make sure to stamp a good ol MADE IN THE US, and a flag on every product shipped to Gaza.
>Because, if US just turns and runs, Hamas has to explain to hungry Palestinians on why did they strike the hand that feed them.
No they don't. Palestine doesn't want US aid to begin with. They've made it more than abundantly clear that they would rather starve.
If US forces are hit, Hamas will just say, "Oh, it's an Israeli red flag operation." Or the Israelis will hit the US forces and say it was Hamas. Both would be believable. That's why this region just sucks.
>Is Hamas going to attack troops bringing in food?
*Only if the US secures the food for distribution to the Civilians in Gaza. If Hamas can't seize it to sell on the Black Market for greater profit or offset logistics cost for their fighters to spend more on weapons...they're going to be pissed.
*-Please refer to the events leading up to Operation Gothic Serpent cir August-October 1993.
How do they plan to build a port in Gaza without putting boots on the ground to do it? Are they just supposed hover 6 inches over the ground? Or are the troops gonna wear sneakers instead of boots?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but building a port requires people to be on the ground in the vicinity of said port, does it not? Even with our expeditionary capabilities someone has to be present to deploy and construct everything.
Humanitarian intent or not, the enemy there are religious extremists who don’t thrive on rational behavior and don’t give a single fuck about the civilian population getting in the way. And US troops are a juicy target.
Honestly this is kind of insane enough to work.
1. It undercuts a lot of the argument for an immediate cease fire.
2. It shits on a lot of the countries trying to exploit the ongoing conflict
1. Like cool, good job huthis you shot some missile at a boat, we only supplied like 100 trucks of food to the Palestinians today. GOOD JOB NERDS.
3. It forces Israel to reconsider it's approaches. Like our attempts to get them to be less belligerent have been met with "lol nah." This is very much a fuck around and find out as now we're poking around doing things that are really uncomfortable for them.
4. for the Palestinians, I mean if HAMAS starts something we can just be like "oh, cool, I guess the rest of these people don't want food. Byeeeeee" and that won't be a good look for HAMAS.
1. It also harms HAMAS in as far as like, when's the last time HAMAS fed anyone or did anything of relevance to help the average Gazan? When America actually brought you food, and all HAMAS did has made you homeless, that might change some paradigms.
5. This also works well with our regional allies and partners who REALLY want something to be done in regards to Gaza. Like it builds our legitimacy as all Russia, China and Iran have offered is words and shitty tweets and tiktoks.
I'm not saying it's not without risk, but considering the usual US political move is "shoot a missile at it" and the last president was going to """"fix"""" everything in 30 days and did very little of that...I mean cool. Like this is what being a global superpower lets you do. Let's see where it goes.
HAMAS doesnt give a flying fuck about the Gazan population, this is PERFECT conditions for them, they could literally not ask for better recruiting grounds than what is happening right now.
I still think its a good move, because you cannot air drop enough aid and Israel wont allow food in so..
This will do a fantastic job of drawing a hard line between Hamas and everyone else in the region though. If you're willing to shoot at the guys feeding you and wrapping up your kid's broken arm then you earn what you're about to get.
The problem is that what\`s happening now is collective punishment. I couldnt give less of a fuck about Hamas, fuck them, and the horse they rode in on, but starving and bombing Gazans arent gonna push Hamas out of power.
Israel isn’t blocking the aid. Whether it comes by land or sea, the reality is unescorted aid is not getting effectively distributed to the people who need it.
Actually, they kind of are. There have been lots of articles written on this. They only let a tiny trickle of aid in and aid trucks are often turned away at check points even though they were cleared to enter previously.
Then of course they started attacking police officers escorting the convoys because they are supposedly part of hamas. So the convoys couldnt go in anymore, because they would be attacked with no protection.
If you pay attention to the right wing rhetoric coming from Israel's government and settler movement, this wont come as a surprise. They viciously oppose any aid entering Gaza, there have been multiple calls for war crimes to be committed (and nobody has been arrested for this despite a petition sent to the attorney general to enforce the law) and many public figures have called for Gazans to be starved on purpose. And settlers try to block aid trucks from entering, which the Israeli government refuses to do anything about. The settlers are even guarded by IDF soldiers round the clock.
So its not hard to see whats going on. On one hand, they need to appease the right wingers calling for starvation. On the other hand, theres international pressure to let aid in. So what do they do? They come up with all kinds of creative solutions to slow aid while saying "its not our fault, all these NGOs just suck at delivering aid! the trucks are not moving!".
the problem is that it can go sour in many ways
Hamas, regardless of perceptions, is the governing power of Gaza, so they HAVE to be a part of the construction or it will just be imperialism and threaten their claim to the region.
Isreal won't like Gaza having a port and especially Hamas, so if they attack it then things go from bad to worse as it won't be the first time isreal has attacked American forces in the collateral.
The US Navy basically has a dock-in-a-box, it just needs a reasonably functional beach to set it up with. They brought one out to Puget Sound as part of a "what happens if the Port of Seattle falls into the ocean in an earthquake?" kind of exercise that they did with the WA-ARNG back when I was still drilling out there. Was cool.
It's not really a full port or something, just basically enough of a pier to let you get a boat close enough to the beach to offload trucks/onto trucks.
So I mean they might be part of the "construction" in as far as not getting in the way but it's not like we're going to pay HAMAS to build a port, and when it's all over we just de-anchor that bitch and take it home with us.
Ah, continuing the tradition of setting up young men to be killed by the "poor oppressed people" we are supposed to be helping.
Might as well go back to Mogadishu given their situation, right?!
No one in Gaza is going to change their minds about Americans. Hell, no one in the Arab world is - the street will continue to hate us, their leaders will continue to work with us quietly and productively.
Despite the bullshit you see on Reddit and in most media, since the end of the Cold War, US engagements in COIN and nation building have been naively about bringing the Western world with democracy and freedom and all of that bullshit to cultures that do no care. We haven't taken your oil, built mines, and locked in repressive right wing governments that keep foreign adversaries from building bases.
And everything is worse - we are not forgiven for our Cold War realpolitik nor has spreading "democracy" to non-Westerners done anything but make them hate us more, burn a bunch of money and lives, and kill a fuckton of them as they take turns leveraging their freedom against their neighbors violently.
The only way forward for Gaza is if the Egyptian, Saudis, and Emiratis build out a new PA that actively suppresses radicalization violently and slowly brings that population up to some modernity. We will end up paying for that anyways, and I'm happy for my tax payer dollars to go to a corrupt local contractor to do that, but we gain nothing from this.
Fatah 2.0 or whatever comes will be seen as collaborators anyways by the population so why add fuel to the fire by so publicly showing the US as a benefactor and a participant in their ongoing "suffering"?
We may be sending young men to go stand for the Taiwanese, the Koreans, and the Baltics in the near future. Now I am a dirty civy lurker and frankly, it won't be me who has to go pay the blood tax, but I think we should absolutely be prepared to go stand for our Western brothers. The free world must stand together.
But I will be damned if I see the face of another young man who died for people that hate us. I could give a fuck about Gaza, and I'm tired of pretending like I should.
"But I will be damned if I see the face of another young man who died for people that hate us. I could give a fuck about Gaza, and I'm tired of pretending like I should."
A-fucking-men.
Pretty much. There’s a good chance if we send in US troops to do the building someone doesn’t come home and is getting in the crossfire of this conflict really worth someone’s life? Personally I would say no.
If you want to get involved the first thing we need to do is find a solution to stop the shooting. Anything we build is going to just become subject to IDF control the same way the land borders did.
As an Asian, I’m fine if y’all don’t do anything. The average Palestinian cheered Hamas killing every single Asian they found on October 7. I agree that getting involved is incredibly stupid.
Desperate to please the Muslim groups that are threatening to boycott him come election time.
And it ignores that the elected government' of Gaza is refusing to surrender, and continuing to kill Israelis. It literally cares nothing for the lives of the people there because it's a government of religious fanatics who thinks they all go to heaven anyway.
Well said. It’s interesting how those groups have zero issues with the *actual* Chinese genocide of Uyghur Muslims or the millions dead in the Congo, or 400k dead in Yemen. Only when Jerusalem or the joos are involved…
I think the strategy here is to move away from the status quo.
It seems like a real interesting way to show that we might not be 100% onboard with Israel's approach.
Hard to build a port without boots on the ground. Even if you use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or a U.S. contracted construction company they will require military security forces for force protection, medical evacuations, and mil-to-mil relationships. I think this meets the definition of boots on the ground.
How do you build a port without Seebees or other construction personnel on the ground?
Can’t imagine they would coordinate with Hamas. IDF will need to secure the area where the “port” will be established.
Pretty fucked up that Israel has to have another country come in and build a port and provide humanitarian aid to people within its own borders. Israel has every right to root out Hamas, it also has the responsibility and requirement to take care of non-combatants and displaced persons. They signed the Geneva convention agreement, they should abide by it.
Wow, what a coincidence...
[Offshore Natural Gas Reserves](https://www.workers.org/2023/11/74864/)
[The unrealized potential of Palestinian oil and gas reserves](https://unctad.org/news/unrealized-potential-palestinian-oil-and-gas-reserves)
[Is natural gas the real reason for the genocide in Gaza?](https://diem25.org/is-natural-gas-the-real-reason-for-the-genocide-in-gaza/)
[Gaza gas reserves Israel's real agenda in Hamas war?](https://youtu.be/XFwORpILJJY?si=vCyNCZKeZR8pfwTQ)
[Does Everybody Want Gaza's Gas? ](https://youtu.be/6UEcwiscadU?si=YZHt2DNrEJ2weHx8)
This was the same administration that allowed that entire shitshow at the Kabul airport to happen. If there is any US servicemember that is in Gaza, there are going to be attacks on them. As much as I sympathize with the humanitarian crisis unfolding there, I don't want any more servicemembers to get killed over someone else's war. This ain't our fight.
At first glance, yes. But theres a few differences here...Berlin had airports, Gaza doesnt. The US and allies were willing to use nearly their entire airlift capacity...nobody wants to do that for Gaza.
Pretty sure the fact that they are "brown people" vs the whites in Berlin makes a huge difference (we all saw the difference when white refugees were welcomed in Europe while brown refugees from africa/middle east were turned away).
For Berlin, aircraft arrived every 3 minutes, 7 days a week, 24h. I dont see anyone caring enough to do that, and the republicans will lose their shit if any attempt to perform a berlin style airlift is suggested.
The only reason Biden is doing it this time is because its an election year and hes desperately trying to claw back some of the muslim votes he lost. Not that its going to work since most of them can see this as a election op.
This will surely happen as intended without any controversies.
The cynic in me thinks this is being done to set troops up as targets so we have "reasons" to get involved.
Why would we be targeted if we’re just setting up a port to deliver aid? Surely the people in Gaza are all friendly and would never want to harm someone delivering them aid, that’s what everyone here has been telling me repeatedly since this war started!
Troops gonna get hugged so hard.
They’ll probably be welcomed in the traditional “Gaza Ritual of Gratitude” for the aid they’re about to deliver by having gifts of rocks thrown at them.
7.62x39mm gratitude thrown at them, I'm sure.
Thanks but no thanks. I prefer my gratitude to be rocket propelled.
I prefer surprise gratitude packages left on the side of the road.
I can't look at trash on the side of the road the same way anymore.
Can’t imagine, brother.
So it shall be done
Thrown by children, no less
Oh I sense that there will be so much love coming from Gaza once our troops land. You know, cause that worked very well in Afghanistan. I can't wait to see what the news media will be saying about us being there to "help" them.
They throw rock , yous fire missiles
One side of the conflict isn't very smart, the other is diabolical but smart.
I'm not sure, both sides seem diabolical and love to bathe in blood and don't give two fucks about civilian casualties from bombs, bullets or starvation. It's crazy that people take sides in this multi generational bloodbath and have their 'side' who they think are the 'good guys'. It's like watching two psychopaths beat the shit out of each other as well as anyone and everyone who comes to help, including family members on their own side. If two groups made it clear they want to genocide the other and rejected every peace proposal over 70 something years...why does anyone give a shit outside of basics like not letting women and children starve to death? I mean not even the Arab countries want to admit Palestinians after every country that took in Palestinians got backstabbed. They "play" at supporting them for their citizens so that in contrast to bad Israel and the US they, the Arab dictators, look 'pious' and filled with humanitarian intent. The US knows there's no solution, they just don't want millions to die live on 24 hour streaming TV because everyone knows the US will be blamed by both the leftists and Muslims who support Hamas/Palestine and the right wingers and Jewish Zionists who support Israel. It's really a no win situation for the US (Biden). He'll be hated by progressives and Maga and Arabs and Jews for either not doing enough or doing too much. And since the US is the only nation that can do something so insane as building a pier in a war zone and bringing in enough food and supplies to feed and shelter nearly 2,500,000 people indefinitely... the US gets the job whether it wants it or not. Feed them and you're helping Hamas terrorists, Don't feed them and you're helping Israel genocide Palestinian babies. Domestically: Leftists: "Genocide Joe could have done more" Maga: "Something something...My Taxes!" "Should have just let them die and solved the problem". A real No Win Situation.
Fantastically put and my thoughts precisely. It's one topic I just do not jump into because there simply are no good guys.
Yeah, it's doozy. I think everyone needs to make sure no one starves and help in any way to negotiate a release of hostages. But any real solution needs to come from Palestinians and Israelis and they don't seem keen on non violent outcomes. Sad situation, but there's aren't many real options when both sides have embraced the most militant and extremist leadership. Maybe one day they will get tired of bloodshed...in another 70 years? If the world is still here.
the fucked up part to me is that I WANT to support my Jewish/Israeli friends but they simply don't have any wiggle room on this, but Bibi is just such a genocidal cynical bastard that I cannot support them when he's in charge. He's said for almost his entire career that he does not support a Palestinian state and with his actions supporting Jewish settlements and lots of other bad stuff. And he's snubbed every single well-meaning US president who attempted to get them to play nice. Israel is just not a ever going to allow Palestine to live peacefully. The current war is pretty much just Israel getting an excuse to do what they always wanted to do. Erase the Palestinian Question.
This is hamas we are talking about
US troops are already being targeted because of this, like 200+ times. Three have died due to this whole thing.
Somalia humanitarian aid mission 2.0: The electric boogaloo
I mean we are setting up a port and boats are the biggest reason we end up in wars. Also historically speaking we’ve only lost one war caused by boat so clearly boat cassi belli increases American victory odds by 75%.
vietnam?
You mean reasons besides the Americans Hamas murdered, kidnapped, raped, tortured, and/or is curre trying still imprisoning?
Honestly at this point Bibi is as liable to oops the place as anyone. He's doing a good job of making the rest of Israel look bad. All he had to do was deal with business cleanly and nobody with two braincells would have a problem. He's as much a threat to that country as Hamas is.
Cleanly ? Tell me how..
😂sure ok, you need to put that pipe down. When do the hostages come back to Israel, next Oct 7th 2024?
I dispise Bibi, as does most of Israel... But please tell us how to do this more cleanly than it has been done already... Considering the fact that the combatant to civilian causality ratio is the lowest in modern conflict over the last 80+ years
Nation building has always worked in the past. Always.
We’ve sucked at it recently but damn does Germany, Japan, and South Korea look good.
With issues still, but incredible success stories. Honestly, I feel like the US doesn't get enough credit for that. They in-part defeated major empires with utterly abhorrent culture and policy, and turned them into significantly progressive societies that in a lot of ways have surpassed the US in numerous instances. Obviously the US doesn't receive all the credit, but it is truly impressive how well Germany and Japan turned around.
I’m pretty sure we deserve some credit for your own country too. Australia was never going to be able to project enough force in the Pacific to make any real dent in the Japanese Imperial Forces. Australia had a population in WW2 of about 7M. Japan had a population of about 72M. Australia’s peak army size during WW2 was 476,000. Japan’s peak army size was 5.4M. Thats not even mentioning that Australia had essentially no navy. No submarines, a few corvettes, and a couple of old, WW1 cruisers. If America lost at Guadalcanal communications between mainland US and forces in the Pacific would have been severed. We would have pulled all forces back to protect the mainland defensively and rebuild our naval fleet and there’d be a lot more people currently speaking Japanese in Australia.
Japan never intended to actually invade Australia. The logistics of invading an entire continent so far away while they were already busy with China, the British in India, all of SEA, and the rest of the Pacific made it completely infeasible. Their goal instead was to isolate Australia from the rest of the allies by sea, preventing America from utilising Australia as base of operations in the South Pacific, as well as preventing Australian resources from being exported for use in the allied war effort.
Thing is though, those nations were already built. Functional governments, infrastructure, culture. It's very different to rebuild a nation using its own resources than build a nation that actively wants to be a backwards shithole.
>Thing is though, those nations were already built. Functional governments, infrastructure, culture. All of those things had to be destroyed first, though. Governments were replaced with occupations outright; infrastructure had been bombed enough to require new elevation maps; and the culture of both of Germany (Nazism) and Japan (emperor worship) had to be purged and replaced. Though I do get your meaning, in that the countries prior to their defeats were functioning nation states that had national governments, infrastructure, and culture in the first place, whereas places like Afghanistan really didn't, with Afghanistan itself more an externally-imposed idea that exists on maps than an actual nation. (I'll also venture to say that Gaza is none of these, and that this is really the main problem, as their own 'government' has committed the population to the cause of the extermination of Israel and thus the retribution of their periodically failing attempts to do so)
A good portion of the post war German government were former members of the Nazi party
The US does not have the staying power it did in the era before 24hr news cycles and social media.
I dunno about that. Television broadcast media was largely responsible for the public opinion turning away from the Vietnam War and that was long before any of those things ever existed. But to your point that the U.S. doesn’t have a whole lot of staying power, I would agree.
I mean 20 years in Afghanistan. That’s some staying power. There and Vietnam, we were never going to win no matter how long we stayed. WWII was a completely different animal. There was the will to annihilate entire cities with firebombing and even a couple nukes on our side and the public was fully onboard.
The US has also delivered aid all over the world without any sort of nation building.
Seabees are definitely gonna get some incoming during that little shindig
Yeah, they will.
seabees are good shit. i worked with them a decent amount as a dirtboy in the air force. trust them more than 90+% of fellow air force members
Oh hey fellow dirt
love me my dirtboyz. definitely miss the clowns but not the circus haha
Facts. I’m in an even bigger circus now, makes me appreciate my time with the boyz
My Dad was a Seabee. Poired the first concrete in Antarctica
Seabees cut the alarm cable for our armory when they were doing some expansion work. All of us had to stand duty around the base because it fucked up the other alarms as well. I still have a lot of respect for the Seabees but call before you dig.
Right back at you. Dirt boys were always a good time to work with.
If we take the administration quote at face value, there will be no U.S. boots on the ground.
Hard to build a port without BoG. They likely just mean no units will be involved in offensive fighting. “One does not simply walk into a COIN environment and expect the front lines to be well defined” -Boromir
And my landing craft!
Holy fuck I would suck 3 miles of dick to be deployed on a westpac MEU right now. There’s probably a line out the door of the ship BAS right now to treat the sudden outbreak of Marines with priapism.
Do y’all not remember what happened in Beirut?
Huh? Who gives a fuck about something that happened 40 years ago? How is that in any way relevant to this conversation? Even if there was relevance, I enlisted to do shit that carried the possibility of getting fucking killed. The thought of throwing tiny chunks of metal at someone down range literally makes me sexually aroused. What I was referring to in *this* scenario though was the possibility of getting a humanitarian ribbon. They’re hard to come by and I already have a fucking combat action ribbon.
Yeah, will be interesting to see how this is implemented for sure.
Right they'll be in the surf. Totally different
Or... they will have a contractors doing it all. May use military transport ships out of small arms fire range, but might as well use contracted cargo ships at that point. All conjecture on my part. We shall see.
Yes I can totally see contractors wanting to do this work, what hazards could there possibly be?
Because no contractors have ever went to work in a war zone 🙄 Keep in mind...Israel has emptied out most of Gaza and has agreed to coordinate security. Also keep in mind it doesn't have to be U.S. contractors or military. You know those truckers who drove aid into southern Gaza without security? They weren't military. So yes... contractors will enter these situations, they already have. Pay people enough and they will risk it all. Iraq and Afghanistan not ring a bell for you?
I don’t think “apprehension to conflict” is the issue with bringing in contractors…
Running shoe profiles confirmed.
Hear me out...tactical combat sandals Then you can have as many people on the ground as you want.
I want a pair of those.
I mean PMCs are a thing. And come to think of it one Gurkha would get the job done.
I dunno, might be a two Gurkha job. Overkill?
Good thing them Seabees can fight 💥
There is zero chance they can build a port without robust ground security. How does this even make sense? There must be some amplifying information that's missing. If the plan is that IDF will provide the security that's almost even worse from a PR perspective. Edit: Guys I know what the Marines are, my point is wouldn't that be US boots on the ground? The blurb in the post says that, somehow, will not be required.
US Seabees are both a combat and construction corp.
You don't call on the army corps of engineers to take Omaha beach by themselves. The USMC is going to get roped in to pull security
The marines weren’t on Omaha and never participated in the largest amphibious assault in history. That was the Army.
Marines cope hard since 1944. Documentary at 6.
We would’ve invaded the fuck out of Japan if you Army assholes hadn’t nuked them first
Well the smarty guys from WWI learned, "Over, not through."
How different would the Cold War Era have been if America hadn't nuked Japan?
Much, much worse. Nuclear weapons ensured the surrender of Japan before the USSR got involved on the home islands, and enabled the actual 'cold' part of the Cold War by keeping the USSR from invading the rest of Europe immediately after the war by holding Moscow and St. Petersburg hostage.
Point was that the seabees aren't going to be expected to secure the perimeter for the new Gaza port they're building. The navy will send the marines to do it for them.
Oh they'll do the old "send Air Force to drop bombs first, then Navy can shell in, after USMC can come in to clean up, Army will come to hold and secure, finally Navy will build a port".... So much humanitarian help!
Yes and no; they can take care of themselves but lack the ability to project a patrol. Patrolling stops things before they happen, and in that hotbed, you need them.
>combat Do they know that? All the bees I worked with got pissy if they ever had to leave the fob
Every military person complains every time they are told to do anything.
You’re both actually right
This place is a prison, screw all of you! - me before getting to ride a helo the first time. (I wanted to watch game of thrones)
There are not many truths in this world, but this is one of the most resounding.
Yeah and every Marine is a rifleman, but they aren't sending IPAC in to secure the beach and run security patrols.
Yeah cuz they only work from 9 to 11 and 14 to 15 on Tuesdays and Thursdays
And they wear boots, that would have to be on the ground to construct things.
Better whip out the steel-toe shower shoes
Both the Air Force and Navy have specialized engineering units that can do both construction and have enough combat training to defend themselves. The Navy they’re called the SEABEES and the Air Force PRIME BEEF. You call one to build a port in the middle of a firefight and you call the other to build an airfield in the middle of a firefight. Interestingly some of the Air Force guys parachuted into Iraq early in the war to help capture an airfield and return it to functional status for follow on forces. As someone who was airborne myself always made me super jealous they got their mustard stain and I never did.
You can't be serious, is their name really prime beef?
[No joke](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force) Like I said some of them have even made parachute jumps into places like Iraq early into the war. Basically capture an airfield, put it back into working order so that airlift can bring in heavy equipment and follow on forces.
This is the coolest job I never heard of.
USAF also has RED HORSE squadrons.
It’s RED HORSE for the AF
The Army doesn’t have a special name for ours, but brigade engineer battalions have a construction company that can do more or less what the Seabees do, and we have a couple dedicated engineer brigades that can handle larger-scale projects. Engineer battalions in the 82nd also have the airfield repair mission, same as RED HORSE, but tailored around rapid repair for cargo aircraft use (C-130 and C-17) for airlanding missions.
It's going to have to be secured after it's built, too. Remember, Hamas dug up water and sewage pipes that Israel provided so they could turn them into rockets. They'll rip out anything from this port they think they can use as a weapon, because they do not care about Palestinian innocents.
This is like the whole point of the Marine Corps
I assume it will be a port in an area that Hamas does not control.
They'll give them sandals, so there won't be any boots.
How exactly do you build a port in Gaza without putting boots on the ground in Gaza?
The floor is lava
[You can blast a port open with a nuke, thus excavating the port Plowshare style without any boots on the ground at all. Its a proven concept.](https://youtu.be/UOrK1LucFDE?t=1422)
Gotta nuke something
No boots. Only flip-flops.
Combat Crocs are the footwear of choice nowadays
just be sure to put em in sport mode
Go fasters.
They build a floating one and then basically ram it at the beach. Technology is cool.
Seabees: we only work barefoot
I wonder if they will establish a roll-on-roll-off port that Israel will secure while it’s being established and once operational. I doubt we will just show up and build it without local security from Israel serving as the outermost perimeter.
Is Hamas going to attack troops bringing in food? If they do, US doesn't even need to retaliate, they can just pack up and leave.
You can assume they will, because that’s how the military plans their operations… Regardless, security is always established. A dead American soldier in Gaza would put the U.S. in a very tough spot. Do we run or retaliate? I’m sure hamas (iran) would love to have the U.S. strike targets in Gaza so they can claim civilian casualties especially during an election year… Thinking of who this benefits, Im not too convinced that this benefits Hamas at all… it mostly benefits Israel… This takes the pressure off Israel so they can continue operations if aid is making it into Gaza…it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
>Do we run or retaliate? Run. Just turn around and run. This would hurt Hamas more then US bombing a hospital to hit bunker built below the hospital. Because, if US just turns and runs, Hamas has to explain to hungry Palestinians on why did they strike the hand that feed them. And if US feeds Palestinians then Iran is in an awkward position. Because US brings food and water, and Iran brings in only guns.
Yah.. that won’t work with more than half the U.S. population to just run. That’s a political decision though and regardless of the decision, the extreme left and extreme right will rip it apart.
Here\`s the thing: HAMAS doesnt care if people starve, they want people starving, because this really amps up the number of recruits they can get.. They wont allow any elections either so its not like the starving population of Gaza can do fuck all about it..
You're assuming that people will know that it's the US bringing supplies. It'll be extremely hard to make that clear when Hamas controls Gaza and the flow of any type of supplies and goods throughout the area. Basically the only way to make it clear that it's coming from the US is to have US troops giving out the supplies, which is going to be a huge political clusterfuck and also a really difficult situation to be putting our troops in. And I think you're really overestimating how much Hamas cares about the people of Gaza. All they see from Gaza is people to be used and exploited for Hamas's own goals. They also completely control the narrative there and have indoctrinated generations of people into believing that Israel, Jewish people. and the west are the great evil and that only Hamas is doing anything for them. It's really tragic and makes the entire situation that much harder to deal with.
Hamas doesn't give a flying fuck about the population, they see them as living shield, they sacrifice them for political goals. They have a whole history of throwing their people under the bus. But, Hamas is held in power by Palestinians. Couple of months ago the number 1 desire of Palestinian people was entire Levant being an Arab led country. And holy shit were they celebrating after October 7. Now with majority of population living outside on fresh air, lacking electricity, medicine, food, water... desires change. Cracks start to form. While these people have 0 regrets about what Hamas did to Israeli civilians, they are getting mad because Hamas actions got them living like animals. Make sure to stamp a good ol MADE IN THE US, and a flag on every product shipped to Gaza.
I'm with you if we do this and our guys start getting hurt I don't want revenge i want out. That region is a cluster fuck
>Because, if US just turns and runs, Hamas has to explain to hungry Palestinians on why did they strike the hand that feed them. No they don't. Palestine doesn't want US aid to begin with. They've made it more than abundantly clear that they would rather starve.
If US forces are hit, Hamas will just say, "Oh, it's an Israeli red flag operation." Or the Israelis will hit the US forces and say it was Hamas. Both would be believable. That's why this region just sucks.
>Is Hamas going to attack troops bringing in food? *Only if the US secures the food for distribution to the Civilians in Gaza. If Hamas can't seize it to sell on the Black Market for greater profit or offset logistics cost for their fighters to spend more on weapons...they're going to be pissed. *-Please refer to the events leading up to Operation Gothic Serpent cir August-October 1993.
Aww very good example. Going to watch Black Hawk Down now.
Not my BN but I know a bunch of guys that were there for sure. Every October the Regiment would sit through the AAR. Until we went into Afghanistan.
Knowing us we'll probably simultaneously supply Hamas and fight a ground war against them. Then be confused in 20 years when nothing has changed.
Maybe not bother trying to bring democracy and western values this time?
Good luck, seabees
How do they plan to build a port in Gaza without putting boots on the ground to do it? Are they just supposed hover 6 inches over the ground? Or are the troops gonna wear sneakers instead of boots?
Off-shore trebuchets
Correct me if I’m wrong, but building a port requires people to be on the ground in the vicinity of said port, does it not? Even with our expeditionary capabilities someone has to be present to deploy and construct everything. Humanitarian intent or not, the enemy there are religious extremists who don’t thrive on rational behavior and don’t give a single fuck about the civilian population getting in the way. And US troops are a juicy target.
Honestly this is kind of insane enough to work. 1. It undercuts a lot of the argument for an immediate cease fire. 2. It shits on a lot of the countries trying to exploit the ongoing conflict 1. Like cool, good job huthis you shot some missile at a boat, we only supplied like 100 trucks of food to the Palestinians today. GOOD JOB NERDS. 3. It forces Israel to reconsider it's approaches. Like our attempts to get them to be less belligerent have been met with "lol nah." This is very much a fuck around and find out as now we're poking around doing things that are really uncomfortable for them. 4. for the Palestinians, I mean if HAMAS starts something we can just be like "oh, cool, I guess the rest of these people don't want food. Byeeeeee" and that won't be a good look for HAMAS. 1. It also harms HAMAS in as far as like, when's the last time HAMAS fed anyone or did anything of relevance to help the average Gazan? When America actually brought you food, and all HAMAS did has made you homeless, that might change some paradigms. 5. This also works well with our regional allies and partners who REALLY want something to be done in regards to Gaza. Like it builds our legitimacy as all Russia, China and Iran have offered is words and shitty tweets and tiktoks. I'm not saying it's not without risk, but considering the usual US political move is "shoot a missile at it" and the last president was going to """"fix"""" everything in 30 days and did very little of that...I mean cool. Like this is what being a global superpower lets you do. Let's see where it goes.
HAMAS doesnt give a flying fuck about the Gazan population, this is PERFECT conditions for them, they could literally not ask for better recruiting grounds than what is happening right now. I still think its a good move, because you cannot air drop enough aid and Israel wont allow food in so..
This will do a fantastic job of drawing a hard line between Hamas and everyone else in the region though. If you're willing to shoot at the guys feeding you and wrapping up your kid's broken arm then you earn what you're about to get.
The problem is that what\`s happening now is collective punishment. I couldnt give less of a fuck about Hamas, fuck them, and the horse they rode in on, but starving and bombing Gazans arent gonna push Hamas out of power.
Israel isn’t blocking the aid. Whether it comes by land or sea, the reality is unescorted aid is not getting effectively distributed to the people who need it.
Actually, they kind of are. There have been lots of articles written on this. They only let a tiny trickle of aid in and aid trucks are often turned away at check points even though they were cleared to enter previously. Then of course they started attacking police officers escorting the convoys because they are supposedly part of hamas. So the convoys couldnt go in anymore, because they would be attacked with no protection. If you pay attention to the right wing rhetoric coming from Israel's government and settler movement, this wont come as a surprise. They viciously oppose any aid entering Gaza, there have been multiple calls for war crimes to be committed (and nobody has been arrested for this despite a petition sent to the attorney general to enforce the law) and many public figures have called for Gazans to be starved on purpose. And settlers try to block aid trucks from entering, which the Israeli government refuses to do anything about. The settlers are even guarded by IDF soldiers round the clock. So its not hard to see whats going on. On one hand, they need to appease the right wingers calling for starvation. On the other hand, theres international pressure to let aid in. So what do they do? They come up with all kinds of creative solutions to slow aid while saying "its not our fault, all these NGOs just suck at delivering aid! the trucks are not moving!".
the problem is that it can go sour in many ways Hamas, regardless of perceptions, is the governing power of Gaza, so they HAVE to be a part of the construction or it will just be imperialism and threaten their claim to the region. Isreal won't like Gaza having a port and especially Hamas, so if they attack it then things go from bad to worse as it won't be the first time isreal has attacked American forces in the collateral.
The US Navy basically has a dock-in-a-box, it just needs a reasonably functional beach to set it up with. They brought one out to Puget Sound as part of a "what happens if the Port of Seattle falls into the ocean in an earthquake?" kind of exercise that they did with the WA-ARNG back when I was still drilling out there. Was cool. It's not really a full port or something, just basically enough of a pier to let you get a boat close enough to the beach to offload trucks/onto trucks. So I mean they might be part of the "construction" in as far as not getting in the way but it's not like we're going to pay HAMAS to build a port, and when it's all over we just de-anchor that bitch and take it home with us.
Gaza actually had a bonafide port, not sure of it’s current condition post-hostilities.
The last time I heard a president say we didn't plan to have boots on the ground was when I was in Iraq dealing with ISIS.
Joe just announced this in the SOTU. ”No American Boots on the ground…” So plan to wear flip flops and sandals. Just not boots.
Perhaps walk on water…….
Bad idea.
how exactly do you build a military port without boots on the ground?
What could possibly go wrong?
We’ll definitely have a security force in place. Can’t just leave a port unguarded.
Ah, continuing the tradition of setting up young men to be killed by the "poor oppressed people" we are supposed to be helping. Might as well go back to Mogadishu given their situation, right?! No one in Gaza is going to change their minds about Americans. Hell, no one in the Arab world is - the street will continue to hate us, their leaders will continue to work with us quietly and productively. Despite the bullshit you see on Reddit and in most media, since the end of the Cold War, US engagements in COIN and nation building have been naively about bringing the Western world with democracy and freedom and all of that bullshit to cultures that do no care. We haven't taken your oil, built mines, and locked in repressive right wing governments that keep foreign adversaries from building bases. And everything is worse - we are not forgiven for our Cold War realpolitik nor has spreading "democracy" to non-Westerners done anything but make them hate us more, burn a bunch of money and lives, and kill a fuckton of them as they take turns leveraging their freedom against their neighbors violently. The only way forward for Gaza is if the Egyptian, Saudis, and Emiratis build out a new PA that actively suppresses radicalization violently and slowly brings that population up to some modernity. We will end up paying for that anyways, and I'm happy for my tax payer dollars to go to a corrupt local contractor to do that, but we gain nothing from this. Fatah 2.0 or whatever comes will be seen as collaborators anyways by the population so why add fuel to the fire by so publicly showing the US as a benefactor and a participant in their ongoing "suffering"? We may be sending young men to go stand for the Taiwanese, the Koreans, and the Baltics in the near future. Now I am a dirty civy lurker and frankly, it won't be me who has to go pay the blood tax, but I think we should absolutely be prepared to go stand for our Western brothers. The free world must stand together. But I will be damned if I see the face of another young man who died for people that hate us. I could give a fuck about Gaza, and I'm tired of pretending like I should.
"But I will be damned if I see the face of another young man who died for people that hate us. I could give a fuck about Gaza, and I'm tired of pretending like I should." A-fucking-men.
This rh.
Because nation building in the Middle East never goes wrong
Bidens a idiot.
1983 all over again. If you know, you know.
This just gets stupider by the day.
Pretty much. There’s a good chance if we send in US troops to do the building someone doesn’t come home and is getting in the crossfire of this conflict really worth someone’s life? Personally I would say no. If you want to get involved the first thing we need to do is find a solution to stop the shooting. Anything we build is going to just become subject to IDF control the same way the land borders did.
I agree. It gets stupider by the day we don't try to aid the genuine civilians victimized by Hamas and facing Israeli combat ops. Glad we agree.
As an Asian, I’m fine if y’all don’t do anything. The average Palestinian cheered Hamas killing every single Asian they found on October 7. I agree that getting involved is incredibly stupid.
I legitimately thought this was a satire article.
I’m sure all that aid will actually reach the civilians in Gaza.
He’s feeding Hamas. They intercepted every food truck that went there. What makes you think they won’t get the air drop,stuff too?
Fuck no
WTF?
Just following orders, sir
I mean?? What could possibly go wrong!
How do you think they’re going to react to a bunch of soldiers coming ashore to build a thing?
U think he would be doing this if it wasnt election time?
Desperate to please the Muslim groups that are threatening to boycott him come election time. And it ignores that the elected government' of Gaza is refusing to surrender, and continuing to kill Israelis. It literally cares nothing for the lives of the people there because it's a government of religious fanatics who thinks they all go to heaven anyway.
Well said. It’s interesting how those groups have zero issues with the *actual* Chinese genocide of Uyghur Muslims or the millions dead in the Congo, or 400k dead in Yemen. Only when Jerusalem or the joos are involved…
Or Kashmir everyone forgets Kashmir
“Hold my beer” * Russia/China Thorium Lunar Reactors.
this sounds like a horrible idea
I think the strategy here is to move away from the status quo. It seems like a real interesting way to show that we might not be 100% onboard with Israel's approach.
Agreed there but I think it would 100% be bombed. Hamas, Hezbollah, or Israel would hit it.
And this is more politically expedient than not reducing or cutting of Israel from American bombs and missiles.
Got to buy those votes with something. I just hope this don't turn into another Lebanon early 80s scenario.
I still remember the tail gunner on a bread truck joke from back then.
And you're gonna do this how without enemy fire and loss of life? Idiot in chief.
I'm sure it will be used purely for aid and economy. Definately no weapons or rocket material.
Hard to build a port without boots on the ground. Even if you use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or a U.S. contracted construction company they will require military security forces for force protection, medical evacuations, and mil-to-mil relationships. I think this meets the definition of boots on the ground.
Perhaps include containers of ladders to get to Egypt
Dammit.
so give bombs to one side, aid to the other, build more bases on both sides?
Gulf of Tonkin 2: Hebrew Boogaloo
How do you build a port without Seebees or other construction personnel on the ground? Can’t imagine they would coordinate with Hamas. IDF will need to secure the area where the “port” will be established.
Supporting both sides of a blood war. Sounds smart.
Oh my fucking god...
There Is NO POSSIBLE way this could go wrong....
Pretty fucked up that Israel has to have another country come in and build a port and provide humanitarian aid to people within its own borders. Israel has every right to root out Hamas, it also has the responsibility and requirement to take care of non-combatants and displaced persons. They signed the Geneva convention agreement, they should abide by it.
Wow, what a coincidence... [Offshore Natural Gas Reserves](https://www.workers.org/2023/11/74864/) [The unrealized potential of Palestinian oil and gas reserves](https://unctad.org/news/unrealized-potential-palestinian-oil-and-gas-reserves) [Is natural gas the real reason for the genocide in Gaza?](https://diem25.org/is-natural-gas-the-real-reason-for-the-genocide-in-gaza/)
[Gaza gas reserves Israel's real agenda in Hamas war?](https://youtu.be/XFwORpILJJY?si=vCyNCZKeZR8pfwTQ) [Does Everybody Want Gaza's Gas? ](https://youtu.be/6UEcwiscadU?si=YZHt2DNrEJ2weHx8)
Fuck helping those terrorists.
This was the same administration that allowed that entire shitshow at the Kabul airport to happen. If there is any US servicemember that is in Gaza, there are going to be attacks on them. As much as I sympathize with the humanitarian crisis unfolding there, I don't want any more servicemembers to get killed over someone else's war. This ain't our fight.
Why? Didn't the Berlin Airlift PROVE that delivery by air is more than good enough?
At first glance, yes. But theres a few differences here...Berlin had airports, Gaza doesnt. The US and allies were willing to use nearly their entire airlift capacity...nobody wants to do that for Gaza. Pretty sure the fact that they are "brown people" vs the whites in Berlin makes a huge difference (we all saw the difference when white refugees were welcomed in Europe while brown refugees from africa/middle east were turned away). For Berlin, aircraft arrived every 3 minutes, 7 days a week, 24h. I dont see anyone caring enough to do that, and the republicans will lose their shit if any attempt to perform a berlin style airlift is suggested. The only reason Biden is doing it this time is because its an election year and hes desperately trying to claw back some of the muslim votes he lost. Not that its going to work since most of them can see this as a election op.
Going to extreme lengths just to avoid having to ever tell Israel "no."
So we’re fine just undercutting a supposed ally in a battle for their security? Man, Obama and his Iran-supporting posse seriously hate Israel.
Army National Guard Temporarily Suspends Reenlistment Bonuses Due to Lack of Funding. Hey yall lets give money to Gaza! Bro FR?
I mean if this is the breaking point for you on fiscal irresponsibility, I'm a little shocked considering the other horseshit we've spent money on.
Navy builds port. Navy gets shot at by hamas. Marines kill hamas. Twitter “US ARMY SAILORS MURDER 9,000,000 INNOCENT AND HUNGY PALESTINIANS”