By MAYA ZANGER-NADIS NOVEMBER 12, 2023 19:09 Updated: NOVEMBER 12, 2023 21:26
Israeli security forces delivered 300 liters of diesel fuel to Shifa Hospital in Gaza early Sunday morning and later received intelligence indicating that Hamas had intercepted the delivery, according to a Sunday night IDF statement.
The “evidence” of edit: stealing fuel provided by IDF is some phone conversation where someone says Hamas will take the hospital’s fuel reserves.
The official can be heard in the recorded call saying that Hamas has fuel reserves of over half a million liters under the hospital and that if further fuel was brought into the Strip, Hamas would take it as well.
Then the evidence of blocking fuel is again a representative speaking on what Abu Rish says…
“Abu Rish doesn’t want this amount [of fuel]. We are trying to convince him.”
Such claims about Hamas are certainly plausible, but I call into question their authenticity, because it’s possible these calls are fabrications by the IDF if they aren’t independently verified. The information war occuring alongside the actual war makes it difficult for me to read through Hamas and IDF bullshit.
Edit: clarified my point a little. Yes they can say they delivered fuel to the hospital with a video that’s fine. It’s the “they’re stealing it” part I’m not entirely convinced.
No geotag, just some nvd footage. Could also be easily fabricated or repurposed footage.
When the hospital did run out of fuel earlier, they did confirm thay Israel hadn’t responded to any requests then, so it’s possible something did change since that time, but it’s also equally likely nothing new actually developed.
To be honest, I'd probably wait for proper verification of the footage by someone like the BBC. And if I were running an information war campaign, I would absolutely fill those cans with water and film myself delivering them. The footage isn't great evidence.
There’s no footage to verify here, the evidence is just an audio recording. The only way to get verification is to find out who is the health officiaal on that line and contact them.
It’s just soldier carrying fuel. The issue here isn’t that IDF lie about fuel delivery, the issue is israel say Hamas blocking the delivery while Hamas deny it, and only sound clip are provided which is super easy to fake. So calling the health official on the end of the line will provide insight about the issue.
Not to mention it was just 300 liters, the hospital uses from 8 to 12 thousand liters a day.
Speaking to Al Jazeera, Abu Salmiya said: “Israeli officials reached out to me twice about providing the hospital with fuel: once to offer 2,000 litres [440 gallons] and then another to offer 300 litres [66 gallons]. Keep in mind the hospital needs from 8,000 [1,760 gallons] to 12,000 litres [2,640 gallons] per day.
Grain of salt on whether Israel actually did it or not. But if they did, that is actually a good amount. It keeps the essentials of the hospital going for 1-5 days (depends how it is broken down, how many ICU beds are full, etc). But it isn’t enough fuel to make them a target for Hamas.
Also: Storing fuel is hard. You COULD leave the fuel tanker in the parking lot but considering that is likely to catch a stray bullet/artillery shell…
And, from the shitty perspective: it keeps said hospitals on a tight leash. Because they can last maybe one day before they have to acquiesce to whatever the IDF wants in exchange for the humanitarian aid.
If there is one thing this conflict has taught us, it is the power of state funded media.
Al Jazeera have been putting in work. They are historically one of the best “view points” for the never ending hell in the middle east, but it is also worth remembering that they are funded by Qatar and were pretty much the first to accuse the IDF of the hospital bombing a few weeks back (that they most likely didn’t do… as opposed to the ones last week that they probably did…).
The BBC demonstrated during King Chuck’s coronation that they are 100% willing to toe the party line. So take it with a grain of salt
What we should be keeping an eye out for are the trustworthy OSINT outlets
The BBC demonstrated during King Chuck’s coronation that they are 100% willing to toe the party line
The BBC is imperfect - but BBC Verify does excellent work analysing and verifying disputed footage https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/reality_check - I'm impressed with their work.
I'm not sure what you think the "party line" is in this case - the BBC has been covering the current action in Gaza robustly with their foreign correspondents. How they covered the investiture of the head of state, doesn't really tell you mucgh about their coverage of Israel-Palestine.
They are good until they aren’t. Up until a month or two ago, I would have gone to bat for Al Jazeera as the closest thing you can get to an “unbiased” source on the never ending invasions of the Middle East. But right from the start of this round of Israel vs Palestine, they have very strongly been showing their side as state funded media. I still think they are incredibly valuable, but now as an alternate source to try to make sense of this mess rather than as a “reliable” source, if that makes sense.
And the BBC has already demonstrated how quickly they will bend the knee to whatever the British government wants, “when it matters”.
Am I saying you should assume they are liars? No. But I would lean more toward the outlets that aren’t state affiliated for something so intrinsically tied to global politics and relations.
It’s not an argument. I was asking for an example where the BBC had ‘bended the knee’ to the UK government, and was suggesting that the coverage of the Coronation was a bad example.
It REALLY isn’t worth arguing with the Royalist crowd.
Like, I’ll dick around with a tankie or a CCP shill. But the Royalists are just rabid in a way that isn’t even fun. Probably a side effect of having one of the most detested Brits of the past few decades (and that is saying A LOT) as a King and having him now defend and protect the Royal Nonce at every step.
It’s certainly worth talking about the merits of the monarchy, but that’s not the issue here. I was asking about the extent to which the BBC’s monarchy coverage had anything to do with its ability to verify footage coming from the IDF. In my opinion they are unrelated.
Dropping off enough fuel to run the hospital for half an hour? Who cares? It was a PR stunt that would have made no difference. 300 liters is a pittance, an insult, a photo op, a lie to make suckers who can’t conceptualize volume think they made an effort to help. 300 liters is less than 80 gallons. This would be enough diesel to run a generator for one RV at full capacity for about 3 days, not a hospital with a ton of lights and computers, a ventilation system and a bunch of kids on life support. They sent enough fuel for one family to go glamping for a weekend.
Don’t run all the lights and computers? Only the barebones essentials. There is math somewhere else in the thread, you should go read it. Some is better than nothing especially in terms of life support.
If you’re talking about the hospital bed math, then that comment can be completely ignored. It’s some random dude on the internet who googled how much electricity an ICU bed uses, and how much electricity some generator they found generates per hour per unit of fuel. That’s literally it.
Hospitals are complex systems that require a ton of power to run. Others who have experience in operations have said it would power minimum operations for about 30m.
If Israel wanted to demonstrate that the donated fuel was stolen, they could have had footage of people hopping out of a truck and loading up the fuel. If it just disappeared into the hospital and they think it was just added to the reserves they think are under the hospital, then their “proof” isn’t worth anything in this case.
They could have given nothing, 30 min of power is better than no power. . Seriously I don’t like how Israel treats the Palestinians but being angry they offered some fuel is pretty fucking stupid. Also don’t you find it strange Hamas isn’t using their smuggling routes for the people in any way? Iran and other support them but they can’t get fuel into hospitals? Shit, they brag about having tunnels everywhere use one to help people.
Look, if you have 50 starving families and you give them a Subway foot long roast beef sandwich, you shouldn’t be patting yourself on the back because it’s better than nothing and some dude on the internet asks Google and finds out that they get 8 calories each, which is enough for 30 seconds of metabolic activity, which is better than nothing.
And I am not addressing the morality of Hamas operational decisions or the veracity of their claims in any way. I suspect that the majority of their resources are occupied (no pun intended) with combat operations and are unavailable for civilian resupply efforts.
But the immorality of Hamas’ operations (if it is such) is not a justification for immorality on Israel’s part, except insofar as it has an operational impact on Israeli forces. Israel cannot say they are capable of supplying basic aid (or allowing the international community to do so) but the fact that Hamas is choosing not to themselves give up their food and fuel reserves justifies prevention of supply. I don’t know of any moral framework that would permit that.
You initiate an operation that you know will significantly disrupt civilian infrastructure including critical supplies. You know that the enemy organization you’re supposed to be concentrating your efforts against will be hoarding supplies to continue operations during lockdown. Therefore you know, before the first plane takes off, that you either need to take responsibility to maintain or create a supply line, or you’re doing what Israel is currently being accused of doing, which is starving out the civilian population indiscriminately. You can’t simply say “Someone else should do it” and have a morally defensible position, especially if your actions brought those conditions about.
A billionaire donating a single sandwich for millions is “better than nothing” but if that’s good enough for you in a massive humanitarian crisis you’re a self obsessed loser who cares more about making themselves feel good than actually doing something meaningfully useful.
I bet you flip quarters at homeless people and skip home thinking you did something today.
I never called it a good thing just better than nothing. Keep exaggerating to make it seem worse. Fuck just judge this situation based on what it is, instead of making dumb comparisons.
Hamas builds their terror infrastructure under Gazan Hospitals, Mosques, and Schools knowing when they've finally provoked the Israelis to invade the feckless antisemitic west will pressure Israel to stop before destroying them.
Gas for Hospitals prevents the "Progressive" cunts from screaming GENOCIDE, while "Palestinian" headcount has only increased a hundred fold in the last 75 years.
Hamas builds their terror infrastructure under Gazan Hospitals
It's absolutely possible - probable even in my mind, but I've yet to see this verified independently. The Israeli government insists it is so, but hasn't to my knowledge proof.
With diesel, Hamas can power air circulation vents in their tunnels, as well as water pumps (some people in comments on Lemmy said that the low sea level there may affect the depth of the tunnels).
Probably not their rockets but continuing their war effort in other ways that absolutely doesn’t benefit the citizens of Gaza and especially not the people who are in danger because Hamas is actively doing everything they can to maximize collateral damage, suffering and casualties on all sides of this conflict.
Top that off with how a lot of their funding comes from Iran and their recruiting goes all over the middle east, the psycopaths in Hamas right now are not likelu Palestinian or have any empathy for the people they use as an excuse to attack innocent civilians.
You see to be justifying that? As in “well of course the terrorists are stealing the fuel”? And yet you are at the same time blaming Israel for the fuel shortage? Wow.
Hamas puts their rocket launchers next to schools, so the only way to take out their ability to launch rockets at Israeli civilians also has a high likelihood of damaging the school. Hamas puts terrorist HQs in tunnels under hospitals, weapons caches in apartment buildings, and so on. This is deliberate; the point is to increase Palestinian suffering in order to ensure that Palestinians and Israelis cannot make peace, with the ultimate aim of establishing a new Islamic State in Palestine.
Unlike the PLO, Hamas has never been signatory to the Geneva Conventions. Hamas explicitly repudiates the notion of a civilian/military distinction, both for Israelis and for Palestinians.
There’s a really good reason that nations should comply with international law and not do shit like deliberately put military targets in civilian buildings.
There’s a really good reason that nations in armed conflict should comply with international law and not conceal military targets as medical facilities.
Why? Because doing those things makes the civilian buildings and medical facilities into legitimate military targets.
A major goal of the international law of war is to reduce civilian suffering. The rules that Hamas is breaking, are rules that exist to reduce civilian suffering – in this case, the suffering of Palestinian civilians.
But yeah, if your foe is shooting at you from an ambulance, yes you get to take out the ambulance. If your foe is shooting rockets from a school, yes you get to take out the school. Ambulances and schools aren’t supposed to be shooting at all.
But again, Hamas doesn’t recognize a civilian/military distinction. This makes them a really shitty government.
Hamas is the government of Palestine in Gaza. They have been the government there since 2006. A group can be both the government of an area and a terrorist organization. Sucks, but it happens regularly.
Unless you are just being pedantic and arguing that a ‘government of a nation’ and a ‘nation’ are different things. Then sure, I can read a dictionary as well. But, I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that isn’t what you mean.
There’s a really good reason that nations should comply with international law and not do shit like deliberately put military targets in civilian buildings.
Because then the nation economically crippling them will shoot those innocents and commit more war crimes?
When a robber takes a hostage you don’t shoot them through the hostage unless you’re a deranged sociopath.
When a robber takes a hostage you don’t shoot them through the hostage unless you’re a deranged sociopath.
When the “robber” keeps shooting missiles at you, you indeed do shoot. If Hamas cared one bit for the safety of Gaza they would cease their attacks. But they don’t. And leave Israel no choice.
Ok so now that we know how little you value human life my follow up question is, why not use techniques that would separate the hostage from the perpetrator? Why is it important that the criminal dies right that second?
Because a criminal exists any life they stand behind is forfeit so you can get to them? Sounds less like justice and more like blood thirst. This is the same mindset fueling police abuse around the world, so hopped up on militant “justice” they disregard the citizens they claim they want to protect.
You completely ignore that the “criminal” is still shooting at you. Your little metaphor has no relation to the reality but I guess it makes you feel good?
This isn’t a crime situation. It’s a war. A major goal of the international law of war is to mitigate harm to civilians. When one warring party doesn’t go along with that plan, the other party is not required to give up on defending itself.
“Ooh, you shot rockets at a city from a school. I guess I can’t do anything about that! I’ve gotta just let you keep on doing that. Wow, putting military stuff in schools is some kind of super power you have, that just prevents me from ever fighting back! Neat! Maybe I should do that too … oh wait, it wouldn’t work, you attack schools all the time, even without military targets in them.”
This is a crime situation. A war crime situation where millions of lives are held forfeit due to the action of hundreds to thousands.
There is a way to go after these people without blowing up every innocent nearby but the conversation has been so poisoned you seemingly think it’s either do nothing or bomb everything.
And as a final thing, this isn’t a self defense thing. Reprisals aren’t defense, they’re revenge after the option for defense is over. You seem a bit mixed up on that.
And people are mad at IDF for not doing a cease fire when Hamas is literally stopping humanitarian aide to the people they claim to represent for their own purposes.
We’re mad at all the propaganda blaming Israel for decisions not made in a fucking vacuum.
Doing nothing has progressively made the situation worse over the past 17 years every time. Limited engagements have lost them the information war and produced severe international backlash and still not eliminated Hamas. Large scale combat operations were always going to be this bad on civilians. It always is. This isn’t counter insurgency. They are fighting a full on war and it took a massively resourced and foreign supported terrorist attack on civilians to get them to commit to it.
This incident among others highlights exactly why IDF and Israel as a whole can’t commit to a cease fire for the same reasons Ukraine couldn’t just try to make peace with Russia. The agressor in both situations is only going to be satisfied when they wipe out every trace of the others existence, would you agree to a truce with someone you know is only going to use the ceasefire to find another opportunity to kill you? Hamas entire reason to be is drive a wedge between the Israeli and Palestinian people and prolong any suffering by Palestinians to justify carrying out war crimes against their neighbors with zero regard to the safety and well being of anyone not fighting for them.
The scary thing is that Israel also has a direct and clear interest in wiping out/exiling all palestinians. It’s the only way they can reasonably have access to all of what they say is their promised land. It would be ignorant of the circumstances and ignorant of history to not take this into account: Israel’s actions since its establishment have shown overwhelming disdain for the Palestinian people’s existence and to that end they have committed similar atrocities to Hamas, but with orders of magnitude more victims.
You’re leaving out the part where all of Israel’s neighbors attacked them when the country was founded. Don’t make it seem like Israel started all this shit as soon as they showed up. Part of the problem here is that Palestinians aren’t completely innocent victims—they’ve hated Jews since long before Israel was a country.
None of that justifies Israel’s war crimes, but people advocating for the Palestinians tend to portray them as completely innocent victims of Israel’s aggression, when the truth is that they have been supporting Hamas for a long time. Sadly, there aren’t really any “good” sides in this war.
Half hour of fuel to run every light and machine in the hospital. For critical care and high priority only its several days worth of fuel, to say nothing of how Hamas proved the IDFs point by plundering it and doing nothing for the hospital
I think the overall point that could be made is not about how useful the help is on an absolute basis, but rather how petty it is compared to the devastation that Palestinians have been subjected to for decades, regardless of the presence of terrorist activity.
The overall injustice that Israel and the IDF represents over the whole timeline is staggering. Pogroms, massacres, bulldozing homes, murder of peaceful protestors, monetary contributions to Hamas, apartheid style laws, and not to mention the now extremely prejudiced bombing of Gaza where they are cut off from resources, and cannot even freely evacuate.
Israel has historically, and now quite directly, placed the Palestinian people into an absolute meat grinder. In the context of this, sending fuel to a hospital is clearly bad faith, even if it was guaranteed to last a week instead of a day.
As someone who has worked (and sometimes still does work) in hospitals, this is not at all how it works. Critical systems have priority, and furthermore have UPS built in. This means that even half an hour of power to the hospital could allow these devices to operate for far longer.
It was probably a test run to see if it would make it to it’s destination. Would half an hour of fuel go to the hospital or would a days worth of fuel go to Hamas. Looks like the test was a success and further humanitarian efforts will be scrutinized further just thrown out the window.
I said this in one of the other posts… We require that people match the headline on the post to the original headline on the article.
If you have a problem with the headline, and it’s word for word the same as what is on the article, take it up with the publication writing the headline.
Is there a reason why? Like I’ve seen i24 post heavily editorialized headlines, same with a few other outlets. But jpost seems to me to put out headlines and content on par with say the Washington Post on terms of it’s reliability.
Like is there an article, or event that cause so many people to out of hand dismiss jpost? Jpost gets dismissed more fully than literal spam sites.
And this fuel would be enough for … (wait for it) 30 minutes. The hospital requires 9000-10000 litres a day.
And don’t forget that until recently IDF was refusing to admit that the fuel is running out in the hospitals and now they offer 300 liters. How generous of them.
Oh and those babies, that they offered to transport, how are they going to arrange it? Seriously this will require special transportation, with transport incubators, special personnel and should deliver them to another hospital with enough fuel and equipment and guess what there isn’t such a hospital in Gaza.
But again this also comes from the IDF who were refusing to admit that there is a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and that they are the reason for it.
If we were to be devils advocates for a second here… if you knew that the terrorists that you’re trying to wipe out would steal any fuel you send in, but everyone keeps telling you to do it anyway, would you send 9000 litres and resupply your adversary or would you send a few hundred litres and record what happens to make a point?
You would send all the fuel a catastrophic situation needs. That’s the point of humanitarian help.
But who are we kidding, if not for international pressure, there would never be any humanitarian help. Or there woulf still be 20 trucks a day, with water for 20k people, in a city of 2 million
Nobody declared war on Oct 7th. Israel has been illegally occupying Palestine (any definition of it’s borders) for decades and has been operating a blockade of Gaza for about a decade.
Both of those are acts of war. One of them is also a war crime. So don’t come crying that Israel got attacked. They could absolutely have kept the power on.
There was a cease fire in place before that. One side broke the cease fire. That’s initiating war. That was an intentional, planned decision to start a war.
That makes no sense. You have to be at war to have a cease fire and they are temporary by nature. The 50 year cease fire in Korea is famous for being the only one to last so long.
Furthermore it was only weeks after the 2014 cease fire that Israel shot an unarmed farmer inside Gaza. You cannot claim there was a cease fire if you were commiting war crimes during it.
Israel specifically prevented Hamas from being able to provide power on their own with the blockade. They were also already supplying it, suggesting a duty to aid.
And how exactly do you know that? And yes as an empathetic human being I would definitely try to help and fail rather than not trying. At least I would know that I have tried.
And just to remind you, the propaganda is not only on one of the sides, but both. And accepting everything IDF is saying as true is a very one-sided way to look at this conflict!
People trying to help and making the situation worse does not help, at all. Putting soothing your own feelings above the pragmatic requirements to solve the situation does not help
This is why politicians are universally hated, but still required
Clutch your pearls harder, I’m not the original commenter and your “discussion” was just you throwing out thought terminating cliches to disregard what people are saying and to ignore the implications of your argument.
Own your position instead of complaining that I called it out with terse, judgmental language.
If you had tried to have a proper discussion, we would be having it. Instead you’re name calling. I am perfectly aware of the tragic end result of that pragmatic argument.
Well you’d know because you have the intelligence that shows that Hamas has been stealing fuel reserves at large. And you’d confirm it by sending a few Jerry cans worth of fuel to the hospital to see if they’d be allowed on or if they’d be stolen. You’re acting like they didn’t attempt to help at all.
These sorts of actions are designed to be trust building exercises. They prove viability of the general concept.
That doesn’t even make sense. I understand everyone’s emotions are high, and what is happening is truly tragic, but can we at least agree on some common logical foundation?
Yep, it’s a real common problem when the government of a country (Hamas in this case) is fundamentally untrustworthy. Makes delivering meaningful aid near impossible.
The current governing party of the Palestinian State is Fatah, that government is not recognized by all nations however, those countries recognize an Israeli occupation instead. What government problems are you referring to by the way?
It’s correct to describe Hamas as the ruling government in Gaza. The error is when people describe it as the elected government. Hamas was elected once; then they cancelled any further elections so they could stay in power after fucking over everyone else who lives there.
You can tell when someone is trying to push an agenda when they refer to Hamas being the government and that the people support it. It’s like if the January 6th fucknuts succeeded in keeping trump in office and then he manages to take total power, very few people in the western world would seriously believe that most Americans would support Trump.
I think the difference is the polling in the region that suggests that if elections were held today, not only would Hamas retain control in the Strip, but they’d gain control of the West Bank from Fatah.
Have you thought about why that might have happened?
Could it have something to do with Israel funding and propping them up?
Is it related to the fact that the only Palestinian territory not being actively colonized is the one with the most Hamas presence?
When a child’s family is blown up by a missile, do you think it might give them a grudge against the group that launched them?
When Israel agrees to lift a blockade and doesn’t, even after a year of Hamas abiding the ceasefire, could that imply the Israeli government isn’t negotiating in good faith?
You can’t comprehensively talk about the “popularity” of an extremist group without analyzing the circumstances that gave rise to them. When we discuss the Nazi regime it’s very often brought up how the economic instability inflicted by WWI made the German people more receptive to Hitlers messaging.
Desperation breeds extremism so continuing to inflict desperate conditions is ensuring conflict will survive. Israel needs to pull out of the West Bank and allow Gaza control of their own utilities and trade.
Could it have something to do with Israel funding and propping them up?
Maybe, but Israel providing funds to the West Bank and Gaza is something that has been demanded by the international community for decades.
Israel needs to pull out of the West Bank and allow Gaza control of their own utilities and trade.
Gaza has control of it’s utilities and trade. Israel only has control in the reality that they provide heavily discounted utilities to the strip as a form of aid. Gaza has received and continues to receive billions of dollars so that it can control it’s own utilities and trade but; it chooses to spend that money on war fighting instead of self control and self reliance.
So if pulling out of Gaza in 2004 didn’t lead to peace and self reliance by the strip and instead has led to a decay in Gaza’s economic well being; why would they subject the much larger West Bank to the same problem?
In 17 years there has never been a single uprising in Gaza. Not one. Only support for Hamas and PIJ, "Palestinians" let them take all the aid which enters Gaza, all the money that is sent by other Arab nations and the West, they give them their homes, they give them their lands, they allow them to build their terror infrastructure underneath all their schools, mosques, and hospitals, they give them their children to fight the Jews. The "Palestinians" have never risen up against Hamas, because the "Palestinians" in Gaza ARE Hamas, PIJ, and a dozen other Islamic Terrorist groups operating in that Jihadi Disneyland they've made.
You are employing pedantry so soften the fact that when give a choice "Palestinians" voted for Hamas to govern them and kill Jews, and they've never demanded a single fucking election since.
I wonder why a population that’s majority children hasn’t risen up against the extremist militants brainwashing them? Why don’t they just get some outside information to figure out a better way? Surely they have a good educational infrastructure that could help them resist the extremist ideology.
It’s sad every time I see you spewing these inhuman takes.
Add comment