• Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    All that Israeli propaganda about new luxury seafront property in Gaza…

    You’re going to love that beach house that has no electricity or running water or sewage or garbage collection or an accessible road or an easy route to a store or a hospital…

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      If they built the beach houses they would run power and water to them. Possibly through that raised road that goes right through the middle of Gaza now.

      It would only connect to the homes of occupiers though.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        And then whenever the Gazans did anything to threaten the luxury homes or utility corridor, oh what a shame, need to push them back further to establish more of a safe buffer zone.

        Oh look, that freed up some more room to build luxury homes!

        Rinse and repeat.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        That sounds pretty expensive to do and even more expensive to maintain considering what’s around it. I sure wouldn’t trust that road to remain structurally sound indefinitely with all the water and power running through it.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          What they’re describing is a real phenomenon in the West Bank, though. Not that they necessarily run all of their utilities within/alongside a single road, but that Israeli settlers will strategically isolate Palestinian communities by building infrastructure that separates them.

          The basic idea is that settlers will pick an attractive hill to build a settlement. They’ll also build a road leading to just that one settlement, and utilities which supply just that one settlement. Palestinians can’t freely cross Israeli territory, they have to cross through specific checkpoints. So they couldn’t cross the road or access any of those utilities without risking violence/death.

          On one side of the road you might have a small Palestinian farming community, on the other side a larger town that they sell to. With the road, the farmers can no longer transport livestock/produce to the town to sell, and the Israelis just dammed the stream they used for irrigation, too. So the choice becomes either pack up and leave, or die in poverty. The larger community loses a source of food, and if their situation becomes too precarious as a result, they’ll pack up and leave as well.

          Then with those communities gone, oh look, more room for settlements.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Most city roads have lots of electrical wiring and pipes runjing under them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they constructed it with that possibility in mind since it is clearly there to separate north and south Gaza and to do so they would need to build some infrastructure along the road’s length.

          I am clearly speculating though, but it would make sense based on Israel’s actions so far.

  • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    i bet they think if they kill everyone they don’t have to rebuild and there will be no crisis “outliving” the war.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      No, they’ll rebuild. That’s prime beachfront property that Israeli settlers could move into.

      • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The word settler is just weird to me. Because the land was already settled. Also I think of colonial settlers with muskets and silly clothes.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I mean, that’s it exactly. It’s just like colonial settlers of old who (shocking, I know) had an unfortunate tendency to take land that already belonged to someone else. Minus the silly clothes.

  • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    This was the plan all along. Kill people, destroy their homes and infrastructure, then be all like “oh yeah we’d love to let you live there but it really needs a lot of work doing right now. But we’ll have it ready as soon as possible. Have you got somewhere to stay? I heard the Sinai is nice this time of year…”

  • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    I would love to see western countries send people, not only supplies to help rebuild Gaza. Preferably overseen by the direct body of UN troops rather than the local UNWRA.

    Maybe then most supplies will actually make it to the people and homes that need them.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’d rather see America rebuild their own country. Have you seen how tore up parts of our country is?

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        We could easily afford to rebuild America and Gaza if we didn’t spend so much money on our military.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          If we taxed the wealthy and businesses properly, like we did back before Reagan, we could easily keep the military and rebuild everything.

        • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          It would be far better to tax the rich like we used to.

          Unfortunately it seems that the military will be useful as Russia needs to be taught a lesson.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          7 months ago

          Military isn’t a problem. It’s a scape goat for people who don’t understand the size of our economy. By treaty we are obligated to spend 2%. We spend about 3%. That’s how large our economy is. It paid for my education and the job skills of many people I know. It doesn’t mean we can’t be more efficient with the spending but the military provides real benefits to society. Ever hear of the army corp of engineers ? NOAA? PHS?

          Military spending is also required by the constitution.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                GDP is not the amount of money spent on infrastructure or foreign aid. That comes directly from tax dollars and need to be measured that way. The entire economic output of the United States is not relevant when discussing infrastructure rebuilding or foreign aid.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  15
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  It’s how we measure funding for programs.

                  And no they don’t come from tax dollars. They come from borrowing which is a large part of our problem. We over spend every year. Our tax revenue doesn’t even come close to our spending.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You could afford to do both if your government didn’t send billions worth of bombs to various dubious allies.