Scale of Gaza destruction emerges

by 158 | January 19, 2009 at 08:15 am

199 views | 16 Recommendations | 12 comments

This is terrible. In addition

to the dead and wounded

there is massive destruction

of homes, infrastructure. It

is time for a permanent

ceasefire, and peace.

The full scale of devastation in Gaza following Israel's three-week offensive is becoming clear, after both Israel and Hamas declared ceasefires.

UN official John Ging said half a million people had been without water since the conflict began, and huge numbers of people were without power.

Four thousand homes are ruined and tens of thousands of people are homeless.

Israeli spokesman Mark Regev said he expected border crossings to open for aid later on Monday.

"We are going to see a massive volume of aid entering the Gaza Strip," he told the BBC.

"Medicines, foodstuffs, energy, all will be reaching the Gaza Strip in the volume that is required and in an expeditious manner."

CONFLICT IN FIGURES More than 1,300 Palestinians killed Thirteen Israeli deaths More than 4,000 buildings destroyed in Gaza, more than 20,000 severely damaged Tens of thousands of Gazans homeless

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

Paschen

at 08:28 on January 19th, 2009

It is madness and a crime, yet I can not see any hope for the people of Gaza yet.

158

at 08:34 on January 19th, 2009

""A spokesman for Hamas' military wing, Abu Ubaida, said its rocket capabilities had not been affected by the conflict.

"We hereby stress that our rockets are being developed and are piling up, and that the enemy will receive more rockets and God willing, our rockets will hit more targets," he said in a news conference broadcast live on Hamas' al-Aqsa TV. """--BBC

I agree on all counts. As this shows they are already preparing for the next war. Sadly, another generation likely will grow up with war and poverty.

René

at 08:39 on January 19th, 2009

How is this a refugee camp?

158

at 08:43 on January 19th, 2009

It is not. Most of the people were born there, are second and third generation.

Paschen

at 08:54 on January 19th, 2009

It is not because that they are born there that it makes it less of a refugee camp.

Palestine refugee camps were established after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War to accommodate the Palestine refugees who fled from the war.

This article lists the current Palestine refugee camps with current population and year they were established.

The UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) defines a Palestine refugee as:

"Palestine refugees are persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War."

UNRWA provides facilities in 59 recognized refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. It also provided relief to displaced persons inside the State of Israel following the 1948 conflict until the Israeli government took over responsibility for them in 1952.

For a camp to be recognized by UNRWA, there must be an agreement between the host government and UNRWA governing use of the camp. UNRWA does not itself run any camps, has no police powers or administrative role, but simply provides services to the camp. Refugee camps, which developed from tented cities to rows of concrete blockhouses to urban ghettos indistinguishable from their surroundings, house around one third of all registered Palestine refugees. UNRWA also provides facilities in other areas where large numbers of registered Palestine refugees live outside of recognized camps.

UNRWA's services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the agency and who need assistance. UNRWA's definition of a refugee also covers the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948. The number of registered Palestine refugees has subsequently grown from 914,000 in 1950 to more than 4.3 million in 2005.[1 ]

158

at 09:07 on January 19th, 2009

Paschen

Thank you for all the good information. I on't disagree with those definitions but refugee means someone who fled another area to excape adverse conditions. I just can't see second asnd third generation people beng called refugees. They are similar to Cubans is south Florida, citizens, part of the community.

But again, good information.

158

at 08:40 on January 19th, 2009

And this is from Benjamin Netanyahu, who is leading in the elections due in 3 weeks.

Netanyahu made a point of mentioning that he coined the term "Hamastan" for the Gaza Strip that is so prevalent today.

When asked whether he felt strange defending the government as opposition leader, Netanyahu replied: "There are many elections. But we have only one state. This is the most just war in Israel's history.

"Israel needs to achieve a decisive victory," Netanyahu added. "The goal has to be to topple the Hamas regime, and I would support the government if it did that. Hamas, a terrorist organization, must ultimately be removed from Gaza."

158

at 11:30 on January 19th, 2009

I agree except I don't think the UN is capable of acting.

First.US, France, UK could veto any action.

Next, the UN is not good at peacekeeping or peacemaking.

They are good at getting donated food and supplies to needy people but other than that they do little right.

An imposed peace would require agreement ot US, EU, and at least no opposition from China and Russia. I wish it would be done but I doubt that it will happen for many years if at all.

158

at 12:22 on January 19th, 2009

My only hope for any peace for now is that as the costs of this war sink in on both sides, deaths, injuries, destruction, national reputations destroyed, just total ack of anything positive, maybe both will decide war is not a viable option.

158

at 20:46 on January 19th, 2009

I am not a bush supporter but would only add a democratic congress inb the past two years gave him more money than ever before to continue a war in Iraq that they said was immoral. Democrats support Israel even more than do republicans, so I blame both.

On Gaza I condemn Israel for not setting up a free Palestinian state 40 years ago and for not giving them an economic start.

But on the just ended-hopefully- war, while the dead and wounded is a major tragedy I can only blame Hamas for firing rockets at Israeli cities for causing this disaster. While their cause may be just they knew with doubt Israel would strike back in overwhelming force. There is much to blame Israel for but Hamas leaders are the main culprits for the death and destruction visited on Gaza.

Thanks for a good comment.

158

at 20:55 on January 19th, 2009

As I have said I blame both sides for this.

I have been accused for blaming Hamas more than Israel and that is true for two reasons, neither being that I support Israeli actions.

First Hamas is more to blame for this latest for firing hundreds of rockets at Israeli cities. No nation would accept that.

Second, while I have not counted 90% of comments and stories on NP support Hamas and/or condemn Israel. The misdeeds of Israel are well documented while the misdeeds of Hamas are excused or ignored. If 90% supported Israel I would be more critical of Israel. In short on NP Israel's crimes are well documented while Hamas crimes are under reported so a little balance is needed.