• @kbotc
    link
    English
    -121 year ago

    It’s a refugee camp in the loosest sense of the word. It’s 80 years old, has permanent structures and is more like a crowded city than something like the Syrian refugee camps.

    To drive home the concept that maybe, just maybe, we should wait until we have verification, this is the camp that Gaza’s Interior Minister (Hamas) claimed was “completely destroyed” about 3 weeks ago:

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/10/31/israel-hamas-war-live-israeli-air-attacks-continue-across-gaza?update=2451841

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      You’re right of course, but I don’t see how that makes any of this better. If anything, it seems you’re saying we should expect the casualties to be even higher because a city is being bombed.

      • @SCB
        link
        English
        11 year ago

        Yes we should. It’s a testament to who evacuated the place is that the casualty rates are only this bad.

        Had there not been a mass evacuation, the numbers would likely be an order of magnitude higher, at least. The Gaza strip is one of the most densely-populated places on earth

      • @galloog1
        link
        English
        01 year ago

        We should. It has been higher in the taking of every city in the middle east in the last 20 years that wasn’t a NATO country.

          • @galloog1
            link
            English
            01 year ago

            NATO is not much better per day of conflict, they are simply quicker and intelligence better. Make no mistake, they would do the same.