294

In Gaza, Israel has turned water into a weapon of mass destruction (www.972mag.com)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Keeponstalin@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Denying water to Gaza has been a key tactic of the war from the very beginning, with Israel shutting off the pipes supplying the enclave on October 7. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced that Israel was “imposing a complete siege on Gaza. No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.”

At the end of October, an internal U.S. State Department report expressed concern that 52,000 pregnant women and over 30,000 babies under the age of six months were being forced to drink a potentially lethal mix of water polluted with sewage and salt from the sea. Since then, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have been severely weakened by rampant hunger and disease, as well as the physical wounds inflicted on nearly 60,000 people and the mental stress of ceaseless bombardment that has taken more than 23,500 lives. All of this renders Palestinians in Gaza even more vulnerable to water-borne illnesses.

By the end of December, as WHO reported, the more than 1 million displaced Palestinians sheltering in the southern city of Rafah had access to, on average, one toilet for every 486 people, while across Gaza one shower served an average of 4,500 people. Sewage flows through the streets and contaminates the hastily erected tents in which hundreds of thousands of people now live throughout southern and central Gaza. Those who are menstruating face intense hardship, with menstrual products, toilets, and water all in direly short supply.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] antidote101@lemmy.world 72 points 5 months ago

Goes against the Geneva Convention.

[-] ad_on_is@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Don't you dare telling 'em how to defend themselves.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 27 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Look this is just an aside but I want to suggest a blanket moratorium on the use of the following language:

"Something-gate"

If the thing did not occur at the Watergate hotel, or is actually not a gate, please refrain.

"Slam/ Slams/ Slamed"

Unless something or someone actually hit the ground with a thunk, retweeting Ted Cruz to all the people who already agree with you is not 'slamming' any one. See here for an example of some one getting slammed.

"something is now a weapon of mass destruction"

Look we've had enough issues around the use of this term incorrectly. Is what Israel doing a war-crime? Yes. Is it a genocide? Yes. Is it a weapon of mass destruction? No. No it is not. Thats the bombs they are dropping. Its those. Those are the weapons of mass destruction.

The laziness of journalists is just sometimes.. shocking.

[-] wrath_of_grunge@kbin.social 15 points 5 months ago

Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits—a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage. - Hunter Thompson (journalist)

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

Would you say you want to fustigate any editor or surrogate who treats the -gate suffix as obligate as they congregate to promulgate articles that castigate and instigate when they should mitigate or even derogate their profligate use of -gate?

[-] Detheroth@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

Ok smartass you got me. I thought you were having an "Iamverysmart" moment until I tried to investigate and parse what you said. Turns out I'm the moron. Well done.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 4 points 5 months ago

But that's not -gate, it's -ate attached to Latin roots that already ended in g.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago

It was a joke, ingrate.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Generally, it's not the journalist deciding the headline. Usually it's some stripe of editor

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 6 points 5 months ago

I agree, but must say I'm pretty disappointed that you didn't use the time a GOP candidate literally body slammed a reporter and STILL got elected as your example of someone actually getting slammed..

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Lords I'd forgotten about that.

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 1 points 5 months ago

Says a lot about the political climate that not only were you able to ever forget about something so bizarre, but it's actually completely understandable!

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Was this the also the guy who challenged someone to a fist fight on the floor of the House?

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 2 points 5 months ago

Nah, that was SENATOR Mullin on the senate floor having to be talked down by Bernie

[-] rambaroo@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Thanks for derailing the whole thread with this stupid ass pedantry.

[-] Boingboing@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

This. So tired of having a discussion and some wise ass comes in and says oh I cant stand headlines with this word. So? Why share with the class? It adds nothing to the discussion besides letting the person stamp their feet in indignation while at the same time adding nothing of any value whatsoever. Congratulations. You shared an opinion that offers nothing but smug self glorification.

[-] SwallowsDick@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

But this isn't a real life discussion with limited space or bandwidth. It's a forum with potentially infinite comments, and you can scroll as quickly as you want

[-] beetus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Your comment is doing the same (and so is mine).

Why complain, just scroll past?

[-] Doorbook@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

People who get enraged by the language of the article instead of the actual genocide going on should reconsider their life..

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They could just lay small tubes with water to pump it over the border if they were scared of weapons but who knows how many Khamassss navy seals could be smuggled through a small tube.

Oh wait there's already water pipes israel just shut them off.

Denying water to Gaza has been a key tactic of the war from the very beginning, with Israel shutting off the pipes supplying the enclave on October 7.

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one -2 points 5 months ago

This is were Hamas leads it's people the Palestinians.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

What? This is a continuation of a long-standing Israeli policy

The deprivation of water and the destruction of water and sanitation infrastructure have long been part of the Israeli effort, in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, “to make the daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian population,” as a UN Fact Finding Mission stated in 2009.

Past Israeli military operations in both of these occupied territories have also led to the destruction of water resources. And for decades, Israel has used water grabbing to dispossess Palestinians of their land and ways of life — impeding Palestinian agriculture in the West Bank and for Palestinians inside Israel. But Israel’s weaponization of water within the framework of its current offensive on the Gaza Strip is on an entirely different scale, with the capacity to cause an unparalleled public health crisis and irreversible ecological damage.

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one -3 points 5 months ago

This post is about Hamas, not Israel.

[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one -4 points 5 months ago

But Gaza is a Palestinian "sovereignty", Israel is not responsible for their requirements (i.e. water, food, electricity, fuel..), it's their governance responsibility, Hamas.

Why don't Hamas supplied water, food, electricity and fuel to their people the Palestinians?

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

The disengagement was not an end to the occupation, in many cases it became a more brutal form of it. It also highlights that the settlements never ended in West Jerusalem or the West Bank, only Gaza. I'll share sources for why international organizations regard the blockade as a continued form of occupation, it boils down to Gaza still being under Israeli military control with Israel controlling its imports, exports, food, water, electricity, sea access, air space, etc.

https://www.btselem.org/gaza_strip

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/gaza-israel-occupied-international-law

https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/28/israel-disengagement-will-not-end-gaza-occupation

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/israel-opt-israel-must-lift-illegal-and-inhumane-blockade-on-gaza-as-power-plant-runs-out-of-fuel

https://books.google.com/books?id=hYiIWVlpFzEC&pg=PA429

[+] GenEcon@lemm.ee -9 points 5 months ago

This article makes it sound like Israel is restricting water supply, but its not. According to the UN (which is well known for not being a pro-Israel source), the water supply is restricted due to fuel shortages, bombing and poorly maintained water facilities: https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/barely-drop-drink-children-gaza-strip-do-not-access-90-cent-their-normal-water-use

[-] vind@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

This is after they "resumed" water supply (mostly coming from Egypt's side).

"Wastewater and desalination facilities were shut down in mid-October due to fuel and electricity shortages and have been largely inoperable since, according to the Palestinian Water Authority."

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/16/israeli-authorities-cutting-water-leading-public-health-crisis-gaza

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That article is about UNICEF operations providing water thru aid (such as aid trucks) which is also impeded by Israel by bombings and targeting of Palestinians trying to get that aid

In 1967, Israel seized control of all water resources in the newly occupied territories. To this day, it retains exclusive control over all the water resources that lie between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, with the exception of a short section of the coastal aquifer that runs under the Gaza Strip. Israel uses the water as it sees fit, ignoring the needs of Palestinians in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip to such an extent that both areas suffer from a severe water shortage. In each of them, residents are not supplied enough water; in Gaza, even the water that is supplied is substandard and unfit for drinking.

Israel has been holding the Gaza Strip under blockade for more than a decade, since June 2007. It does not allow any materials in that it considers “dual purpose”, i.e., that can be used for either civilian or military purposes. This includes construction materials, such as cement and iron, and other raw materials. All these are needed to repair Gaza’s water and sanitation infrastructure, which were heavily damaged by Israeli bombings, especially in Operation Cast Lead (which began in late 2008) and Operation Protective Edge (the summer of 2014). The estimated damage amounts to some 34 million dollars. As of the end of 2015, more than 100,000 Palestinians in Gaza were still cut off from the public water network.

https://www.btselem.org/water

Infographic on how Israel controls water in OPT pre Oct 7

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It's pretty sad the only rebuttal that you Zionists have left these days is straight up lie about what is in the article and hope nobody actually reads it.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024

294 points (92.5% liked)

World News

37340 readers

2530 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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.