The U.S. military has started moving a pier towards the Gaza coast, a U.S. official said on Wednesday, one of the last steps before the launch of a maritime port promised by President Joe Biden to speed the flow of humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

The U.S. military opted to pre-assemble the maritime pier at Israeli port of Ashdod earlier this month due to weather conditions at the Gaza site where it will now be installed.

Officials hope the pier can be anchored to the coast of Gaza and aid can start flowing in the coming days.

“Earlier today, components of the temporary pier … along with military vessels involved in its construction, began moving from the Port of Ashdod towards Gaza, where it will be anchored to the beach to assist in the delivery of international humanitarian aid,” a U.S. official said.

  • @Nurse_Robot
    link
    English
    117 months ago

    The entire force and best efforts from the United States military took over a month to build a pier and cost millions of dollars? Why the fuck did it take so long and cost so much?

      • @Sanctus
        link
        English
        25
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        “Israel has recently announced they suspect members of Hamas to be hiding out in the recently constructed US Pier”

        • InfiniteGlitch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          107 months ago

          I know this is supposed to be a sarcastic joke. However, nothing surprises me anymore. I won’t be surprised if such a thing would happen.

    • SSTF
      link
      English
      197 months ago

      How long does it normally take to build a pier for offloading commercial cargo?

      • teft
        link
        English
        -107 months ago

        It’s a military floating pier so a few days tops.

        • SSTF
          link
          English
          57 months ago

          Is that normally how long piers of this type and size take for the military?

          • @Dasus
            link
            English
            2
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            This type and size?

            Well what are it’s exact specifications?

            Yes, you’re right in that it’s probably quite a large one, but for military pioneers who’ve got a fire under their arse, a month is a loong time. (Edit I looked at images and it really doesn’t seem that big. Dk.)

            So we can only assume no-one was in such a rush.

            I agree with the earlier guy that this could’ve been managed faster, if there had been will enough to do so.

            The capabilities of military pioneers are quite literally awesome. As in, generating a feel of awe.

            The first Allied bridge across the Rhine- Waterloo Bridge-was constructed by the Royal Engineers, assisted by 173 Pioneer Company, in the record time of 13 hours despite enemy fire and adverse weather. Casualties were light. The building of the Rhine railway bridge and its approaches from Griethausen to Spijk was an important operation. Working with the Sappers, four Pioneer Companies were engaged on its construction and in less than four weeks the bridge, some 2,600 ft in length, was open to traffic.

            https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/the-pioneer-corps-british-army-of-the-rhine-1943-46/

            And that was 80 years ago. Capabilities have improved quite a bit since.

            • SSTF
              link
              English
              27 months ago

              The bridge was usable after 4 weeks then?

              • @Dasus
                link
                English
                3
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                No. In less than a day. Some say 13 hours other sources 10. Hours. Hours. While in adverse weather conditions and under enemy fire.

                https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryPorn/s/rmorD1eiMv

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontoon_bridge

                Id even know why I’m arguing this with someone who’s never talked to or even seen a military pioneer (or “combat engineer” as Americans like calling them.)

                https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/this-bridge-is-one-of-the-most-underrated-engineering-feats-of-wwii/

                And for the more visually minded https://youtu.be/Lq1cbKnDdco?si=M5qSZP0DlYeBkEbT

                They were literally portable bridges that could hold tanks and be set up in a “very big hurry”.

                • SSTF
                  link
                  English
                  7
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  It says built in 13 hours but usable for traffic in 4 weeks, and I am trying to parse that.

                  There was a temporary pontoon bridge then, and then a more permanent bridge for traffic built? I ask because pictures I initially saw were quite larger than the initial bridge, which made me question the within a day time.

                  I suppose it depends if the Gaza pier is closer to the first than the second. While the Gaza pier is described as temporary, it seems built to handle high and continuous cargo traffic. I imagine constructing such a platform which is also seaworthy enough to be towed requires more tasks than a single lane pontoon bridge. I also wonder how much of the Gaza pier had to be adapted and customized compared to pre-fabricated bridge segments.

                  Given the difference in type of work, and prefabricated material I wonder if 4 weeks is reasonable or not still. An example of similar maritime construction would be useful I suppose.

                  • @Dasus
                    link
                    English
                    07 months ago

                    Open for traffic as in “now not just for the military, here you go civilians, have at it, no need to go around anymore”.

                    It is written pretty weirdly but that’s what I’d say, because those portable bridges definitely don’t take several weeks to set up.

                    The point I think he and I are making is that if it was just about the capability of building such a bridge at full speed, it would’ve been ready sooner. Instead there’s probably quite a lot of politics going on.

            • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              They had a something like a thousand Seabees out there welding in the middle of the ocean. This Pier has miles of welds. Just look at it. Every seam I’m sure is x rayed and pressure tested. You can see the thing from space.

    • capital
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      This your first encounter with the government?

    • @Altofaltception
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      Had to get the pain and suffering out first.

    • Flying SquidM
      link
      English
      -17 months ago

      It wouldn’t involve America if it didn’t take too long and cost too much.

      • SSTF
        link
        English
        87 months ago

        What’s the reasonable cost for a pier like this?

        • Flying SquidM
          link
          English
          -57 months ago

          Zero, because the money we’re giving to Israel should go to it instead.

          • SSTF
            link
            English
            117 months ago

            It would still have a cost, just paid for from a different source. I was curious how much a pier of this kind is supposed to actually cost, but I misunderstood, and see you were making an entirely different point unrelated to that.

            • Flying SquidM
              link
              English
              17 months ago

              Fair enough, I don’t know the answer to that. But I would also suggest that the corrupt nature of the Military-Industrial Complex means that it will cost a lot more than it would if it were a similar domestic civilian government contract.

            • Flying SquidM
              link
              English
              57 months ago

              Yeah, I have this weird attitude to genocidal regimes where I consider them to be evil. Strange, I know.

              • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
                link
                English
                -67 months ago

                You only consider them genocidal because you first considered them evil, though. Otherwise you’d see it how the many, many learned professionals and diplomats from throughout the West do, who don’t agree with you.

                • Flying SquidM
                  link
                  English
                  27 months ago

                  No, I consider them genocidal because they’re committing genocide.

                  • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
                    link
                    English
                    -3
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    That’s your opinion. International law is based on precedent. Hamas is unprecedented: their zeal for the death of innocents, and tunnel warfare system, their international support from Iranian and Qatari oil oligarchs and monarchs, and their media. That’s what you’re defending right now.

                    How many more generations must be lost to instane religion hysteria because you’re getting tricked by dead kids that were killed by Hamas and some imaginary world history in which Jews are not aboriginal?

                    How about revolting? How about defecting? Nah, inconceivable! Martyrdom™ for all!