Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

[medi]

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

And this paragraph in that article sort of highlights what I can't quite understand:

But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones.

Now, I reckon a combat vet who has dropped food, medical supplies, ammo and such into a hot zone and has done that duty many times would have a leg up on some civilian pilot that needs less lead flying at her/him, her/his crew, and her/his aircraft. BUT now we see to do a good hot zone drop we need training in "humanitarian principles" and I'll bet those that are shooting at me, my crew, and my aircraft have had all sorts of that humanitarian principle training, yes? Them folks on the ground doing that shooting have taken a United Nations course is such, right?

And what in the heck does "operational independence in a war zone" mean?

One thing is for sure; some of you folks need to go back to bovine excrement projection classes, because you ain't got that style that them U.N. folks have got.

That has got to be BS in a very high class mode there: "operational independence in a war zone" - - - that is so cool. If I were an operations officer for one of those units I'd have my maintenance crews paint in big letters on the side of my old C123/C130 "We are operationally independent! Don't shoot at us!!"

 

[uptower]

It's not that the Bush pilots are former military - a lot of those in the UN are, considering the aircraft they fly are also such. Who else is gonna do it?

The issue seems to be the whole organization is a PMC outfit and may be used to undermine the UN's neutral efforts at distributing aid by doing it on behalf of a state actor - quite possibly one of the belligerents in the conflict or the sponsors thereof.

From the article:

"But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones."

There have already been accusations of impropriety over civilians being gunned down at distribution centers in Gaza. There looms the potential danger that state actors might therefore use the aid itself as a weapon - first monopolize it then decide who and where gets to starve.

 

[Mycroft]

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

And this paragraph in that article sort of highlights what I can't quite understand:



Now, I reckon a combat vet who has dropped food, medical supplies, ammo and such into a hot zone and has done that duty many times would have a leg up on some civilian pilot that needs less lead flying at her/him, her/his crew, and her/his aircraft. BUT now we see to do a good hot zone drop we need training in "humanitarian principles" and I'll bet those that are shooting at me, my crew, and my aircraft have had all sorts of that humanitarian principle training, yes? Them folks on the ground doing that shooting have taken a United Nations course is such, right?

And what in the heck does "operational independence in a war zone" mean?

One thing is for sure; some of you folks need to go back to bovine excrement projection classes, because you ain't got that style that them U.N. folks have got.

That has got to be BS in a very high class mode there: "operational independence in a war zone" - - - that is so cool. If I were an operations officer for one of those units I'd have my maintenance crews paint in big letters on the side of my old C123/C130 "We are operationally independent! Don't shoot at us!!"

Sounds to me like the UN, and their contractors, don't want anyone else stepping in on their turf.

 

[cpwill]

Sounds to me like the UN, and their contractors, don't want anyone else stepping in on their turf.

Exactly. For the UN in Gaza, this:

"But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones."

basically means HAMAS is upset that it's ability to control the Gazan populace through food distribution of being degraded.

There have already been accusations of impropriety over civilians being gunned down at distribution centers in Gaza.

Yeah. Funny how HAMAS told Gazans not to go get food from anyone they didn't control, then warned them they would be shooting "collaborators", then needed a terrible news cycle involving dead and wounded Gazans associated with that food distribution, and then - coincidentally - got exactly what they wanted and had threatened.

 

[Rogue Valley]

PMC's can use humanitarian assistence (food) as a weapon... distributing it to a favored group while withholding it from others.

 

[uptower]

basically means HAMAS is upset that it's ability to control the Gazan populace through food distribution of being degraded.

Yeah. Funny how HAMAS told Gazans not to go get food from anyone they didn't control, then warned them they would be shooting "collaborators", then needed a terrible news cycle involving dead and wounded Gazans associated with that food distribution, and then - coincidentally - got exactly what they wanted and had threatened.

Take it to the CT forums buddy

 

[cpwill]

Take it to the CT forums buddy

not exactly a conspiracy when they say what they are going to do, and then do it, my friend

 

[cpwill]

PMC's can use humanitarian assistence (food) as a weapon... distributing it to a favored group while withholding it from others.

Or - as in this case - can attempt to break another groups' attempt to do so.

 

[uptower]

not exactly a conspiracy when they say what they are going to do, and then do it, my friend

The conspiracy here is taking a few incidences and using them as sweeping excuses:Hamas hid in a school of hospital a couple of times? All schools and hospitals are suddenly "valid" targets. Hamas hide in underground tunnels? Let's flatten the whole neighborhood, civilians be damned. Hamas sometimes seizes and? No aid for anyone then. It's all so convenient isn't it?

We're not fooled. The aim has been ethnic cleansing all along.

 

[cpwill]

The conspiracy here is taking a few incidences and using them as sweeping excuses:Hamas hid in a school of hospital a couple of times? All schools and hospitals are suddenly "valid" targets. Hamas hide in underground tunnels? Let's flatten the whole neighborhood, civilians be damned. Hamas sometimes seizes and? No aid for anyone then. It's all so convenient isn't it?

We're not fooled. The aim has been ethnic cleansing all along.

and you claimed I belonged in the CT forum

 

[Pyrite]

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

And this paragraph in that article sort of highlights what I can't quite understand:



Now, I reckon a combat vet who has dropped food, medical supplies, ammo and such into a hot zone and has done that duty many times would have a leg up on some civilian pilot that needs less lead flying at her/him, her/his crew, and her/his aircraft. BUT now we see to do a good hot zone drop we need training in "humanitarian principles" and I'll bet those that are shooting at me, my crew, and my aircraft have had all sorts of that humanitarian principle training, yes? Them folks on the ground doing that shooting have taken a United Nations course is such, right?

And what in the heck does "operational independence in a war zone" mean?

One thing is for sure; some of you folks need to go back to bovine excrement projection classes, because you ain't got that style that them U.N. folks have got.

That has got to be BS in a very high class mode there: "operational independence in a war zone" - - - that is so cool. If I were an operations officer for one of those units I'd have my maintenance crews paint in big letters on the side of my old C123/C130 "We are operationally independent! Don't shoot at us!!"

Is this the Israeli-backed "humanitarian" group? The one that has set up its food distribution centers very close to where IDF forces are located?

Haven't quite a few hungry Palestinians been killed as they attempt to access the food distribution centers?

 

[uptower]

and you claimed I belonged in the CT forum

Well maybe just the shitty excuse forum then.

In either case your assertions are not broadly true.

 

[Pyrite]

Is this the Israeli-backed "humanitarian" group? The one that has set up its food distribution centers very close to where IDF forces are located?

Haven't quite a few hungry Palestinians been killed as they attempt to access the food distribution centers?

From the OP:

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

Last week’s air drop was the latest in a controversial development: private contracting firms led by former U.S. intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world’s deadliest conflict zones, in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts.

The moves are roiling the global aid community, which warns of a more militarized, politicized and profit-seeking trend that could allow governments or combatants to use life-saving aid to control hungry civilian populations and advance war aims.

In South Sudan and Gaza, two for-profit U.S. companies led by American national security veterans are delivering aid in operations backed by the South Sudanese and Israeli governments....

But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones....

``````````````````````````````````

Thanks for starting this thread and for providing the AP article.

 

[sanman]

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

And this paragraph in that article sort of highlights what I can't quite understand:



Now, I reckon a combat vet who has dropped food, medical supplies, ammo and such into a hot zone and has done that duty many times would have a leg up on some civilian pilot that needs less lead flying at her/him, her/his crew, and her/his aircraft. BUT now we see to do a good hot zone drop we need training in "humanitarian principles" and I'll bet those that are shooting at me, my crew, and my aircraft have had all sorts of that humanitarian principle training, yes? Them folks on the ground doing that shooting have taken a United Nations course is such, right?

And what in the heck does "operational independence in a war zone" mean?

One thing is for sure; some of you folks need to go back to bovine excrement projection classes, because you ain't got that style that them U.N. folks have got.

That has got to be BS in a very high class mode there: "operational independence in a war zone" - - - that is so cool. If I were an operations officer for one of those units I'd have my maintenance crews paint in big letters on the side of my old C123/C130 "We are operationally independent! Don't shoot at us!!"

It sounds more like fears over job security, to me.

If you make your living as a movie theater usher, and some new people come along and start taking all the usher jobs, then you might announce your alarm that these new people don't have proper theater usher training, and that this could lead to disaster.

 

[medi]

I don't know about any conspiracy ideas related to whether Hamas is manipulating food and medical aid, but given the history of that organization, I wouldn't be surprised if that were true. In fact, I'd be more surprised if it were not true.

BUT a quick search using Google's search engine seems to point a lot of fingers at that "conspiracy" being true.

Anyway, let me inject a couple of links from just page one:

Gaza: Crowds storm US-backed group's new aid distribution centre

Videos show people walking over torn-down fences at the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's site in Rafah.

www.bbc.com

Israel-backed food aid group admits it won’t be able to reach most vulnerable in Gaza

The UN and other organisations say working with Gaza Humanitarian Foundation would compromise neutrality

www.theguardian.com

https://www.aipac.org/resources/gaza-aid

 

[Pyrite]

From the OP:

Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups

In Gaza and Africa, U.S. contracting firms led by former American intelligence and military officers are taking on aid delivery in conflict zones.

apnews.com

Last week’s air drop was the latest in a controversial development: private contracting firms led by former U.S. intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world’s deadliest conflict zones, in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts.

The moves are roiling the global aid community, which warns of a more militarized, politicized and profit-seeking trend that could allow governments or combatants to use life-saving aid to control hungry civilian populations and advance war aims.

In South Sudan and Gaza, two for-profit U.S. companies led by American national security veterans are delivering aid in operations backed by the South Sudanese and Israeli governments....

But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones....

``````````````````````````````````

Thanks for starting this thread and for providing the AP article.

more from the OP's AP article:

...Starting in late May, the American-led operation in Gaza has distributed food at fixed sites in southern Gaza, in line with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s stated plan to use aid to concentrate the territory’s more than 2 million people in the south, freeing Israel to fight Hamas elsewhere. Aid workers fear it’s a step toward another of Netanyahu’s public goals, removing Palestinians from Gaza in “voluntary” migrations.

Since then, several hundred Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more wounded in near daily shootings as they tried to reach aid sites, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry. Witnesses say Israeli troops regularly fire heavy barrages toward the crowds in an attempt to control them....

`````````````````````````````

Starve Palestinians, then pick them off as they try to access food.

Sounds like a depraved form of hunting animals.

 

[cpwill]

Well maybe just the shitty excuse forum then.

In either case your assertions are not broadly true.

I really need to sit down one day and draw all the parallels between the HAMAS apologists and the Putinista's efforts over Ukraine.

 

[uptower]

I really need to sit down one day and draw all the parallels between the HAMAS apologists and the Putinista's efforts over Ukraine.

I've no time for Hamas or its cause. But Israel uses broad brush accusations to collectively punish the Palestinian people, and right now Bibi's actions strongly suggest a goal of forced removal.

 

[cpwill]

I've no time for Hamas or its cause. But Israel uses broad brush accusations to collectively punish the Palestinian people, and right now Bibi's actions strongly suggest a goal of forced removal.

....think through that claim.

To where?


Line up the political incentives for him. If you go solely from the perspective of domestic political requirements, as of a year ago, Bibi needed to:

1. Wreck HAMAS' offensive capability so that those who had been evacuated from the portions of Israel around Gaza could return to their homes (check)
2. Wreck Lebanese Hizballah's offensive capability so that those who had been evacuated from the portions of Israel near the northern border could return to their homes (check)
3. Destroy HAMAS as an organization with freedom of maneuver and control of portions of Gaza so he could tell the Israeli people he had secured their future against other Oct 7ths (incomplete)
4. Return the Hostages or their bodies (incomplete, but solid advancement)
5. Wreck Iran's ability to threaten Israel strategically (incomplete, but progressing)
6. Establish Deterrence for Iran's willingness to use the ITN from Iraq/Syra (incomplete)
7. Wreck the Houthi's ability to reach Israel with missiles (incomplete)

Most of the domestic opposition (and it is serious) to the way Bibi has been pursuing the war is people who argue that Priority #4 should be Priority #3, but no leader of Israel could choose to simply let HAMAS retain control of Gaza in 2023 or 2024 any more than FDR could have laughed off Pearl Harbor, or George W Bush could have responded to 9/11 by demanding that al-Qa'ida issue a formal apology.

What you are actually seeing in Gaza is not a long-held-secret strategic plan put forward by brilliant masterminds, but Reaction. The Israelis are Reactionary in Gaza. Unlike the campaigns in Lebanon or Iran - where we see the kinds of brilliance they are capable of - they are having to make up what to do in Gaza on the fly, and they are having to do it in incredibly dense, complex terrain while dealing with a massive, impoverished, and murderously hostile civilian population that the enemy deliberately uses as shields and which the enemy's useful fools in the West claim Israel is trying to genocide We don't see brilliance in Gaza like we do in Lebanon or Iran because They Didn't Have A Plan, just those listed requirements, at least one of which may prove unachievable (though the IDF has surprised me thus far).

Bibi has nowhere to put the Gazans, even if he wanted to remove them. Take them into the West Bank? Terrible idea. Take them into the rest of Israel? Suicidal. Egypt won't take them - nor will Jordan. Forced removal?

The problem is actually much more difficult. You have to destroy HAMAS within the Palestinian population while that population remains fixed, and the rest of the world (which has forgotten what urban combat looks like) claims you are evil because of the problem you have.

 

[uptower]

....think through that claim.

To where?


Line up the political incentives for him. If you go solely from the perspective of domestic political requirements, as of a year ago, Bibi needed to:

1. Wreck HAMAS' offensive capability so that those who had been evacuated from the portions of Israel around Gaza could return to their homes (check)
2. Wreck Lebanese Hizballah's offensive capability so that those who had been evacuated from the portions of Israel near the northern border could return to their homes (check)
3. Destroy HAMAS as an organization with freedom of maneuver and control of portions of Gaza so he could tell the Israeli people he had secured their future against other Oct 7ths (incomplete)
4. Return the Hostages or their bodies (incomplete, but solid advancement)
5. Wreck Iran's ability to threaten Israel strategically (incomplete, but progressing)
6. Establish Deterrence for Iran's willingness to use the ITN from Iraq/Syra (incomplete)
7. Wreck the Houthi's ability to reach Israel with missiles (incomplete)

Most of the domestic opposition (and it is serious) to the way Bibi has been pursuing the war is people who argue that Priority #4 should be Priority #3, but no leader of Israel could choose to simply let HAMAS retain control of Gaza in 2023 or 2024 any more than FDR could have laughed off Pearl Harbor, or George W Bush could have responded to 9/11 by demanding that al-Qa'ida issue a formal apology.

What you are actually seeing in Gaza is not a long-held-secret strategic plan put forward by brilliant masterminds, but Reaction. The Israelis are Reactionary in Gaza. Unlike the campaigns in Lebanon or Iran - where we see the kinds of brilliance they are capable of - they are having to make up what to do in Gaza on the fly, and they are having to do it in incredibly dense, complex terrain while dealing with a massive, impoverished, and murderously hostile civilian population that the enemy deliberately uses as shields and which the enemy's useful fools in the West claim Israel is trying to genocide We don't see brilliance in Gaza like we do in Lebanon or Iran because They Didn't Have A Plan, just those listed requirements, at least one of which may prove unachievable (though the IDF has surprised me thus far).

"Brilliance?" ROFLMAO.

Missed a drop on your chin there bud.

 

[cpwill]

"Brilliance?" ROFLMAO.

Missed a drop on your chin there bud.

Yeah. From a dude who spent a decade or so in SOF doing CT stuff.... what the Israelis have done in Lebanon and Iran is brilliant. Absolutely incredible. I would say with moderate confidence it is unlikely we could have pulled that off, from an organizational perspective.

 

[uptower]

Yeah. From a dude who spent a decade or so in SOF doing CT stuff.... what the Israelis have done in Lebanon and Iran is brilliant. Absolutely incredible. I would say with moderate confidence it is unlikely we could have pulled that off, from an organizational perspective.

As for Gaza? They flattened the place and starved out the population. Bra-****ing-vo...

And you missed another drop.

 

[cpwill]

As for Gaza? They flattened the place and starved out the population. Bra-****ing-vo...

I see you either didn't bother to read what you were responding to, or didn't comprehend it:

What you are actually seeing in Gaza is not a long-held-secret strategic plan put forward by brilliant masterminds, but Reaction. The Israelis are Reactionary in Gaza. Unlike the campaigns in Lebanon or Iran - where we see the kinds of brilliance they are capable of - they are having to make up what to do in Gaza on the fly, and they are having to do it in incredibly dense, complex terrain while dealing with a massive, impoverished, and murderously hostile civilian population that the enemy deliberately uses as shields and which the enemy's useful fools in the West claim Israel is trying to genocide We don't see brilliance in Gaza like we do in Lebanon or Iran because They Didn't Have A Plan, just those listed requirements, at least one of which may prove unachievable (though the IDF has surprised me thus far).

If that is still confusing, let me know, and I'll see what I can do to explain it more simply.

And you missed another drop.

Uh-huh.

 

[uptower]

I see you either didn't bother to read what you were responding to, or didn't comprehend it:




If that is still confusing, let me know, and I'll see what I can do to explain it more simply.




Uh-huh.

Gaza is not a reaction, it’s an overreaction, frankly quite likely an opportunity. Bibi’s faction has held a long-term strategic dream of a greater Israel and is using the excesses of Hamas as an excuse to push the civilians out. They certainly helped create the conditions for Oct 7. Now it may not have happened the way they’d like but it has provided the chance to extend their reach. Where it ends I can’t say. Hezbollah, Iran and in some form Hamas will all still be around when the dust settles. The jury is still out on how “brilliant” it has been to pick a fight with everyone. Has been for decades.

 

[cpwill]

Gaza is not a reaction, it’s an overreaction,

.....

putting the specifics of the judgement aside, you do know that an over-reaction is a reaction, right?

frankly quite likely an opportunity. Bibi’s faction has held a long-term strategic dream of a greater Israel and is using the excesses of Hamas as an excuse to push the civilians out.

Uh-huh. So. Again: to where. Where does Bibi think he's going to send over 2 million Gazans. The West Bank? Eilat? Perhaps they will move into... downtown Tel Aviv?

Egypt isn't going to take them - he knows that.

Jordan isn't going to take them - he knows that.

Lebanon? Do you think he's going to move them to Lebanon, and we have all just missed the brilliant build-a-giant-highway-to-Lebanon strategy?

They certainly helped create the conditions for Oct 7. Now it may not have happened the way they’d like but it has provided the chance to extend their reach. Where it ends I can’t say.

Right now, we have one side that wants to commit genocide, but lacks the capability, and another side that has the capability, but isn't willing to do it. Until one of those conditions change, we are here.

Hezbollah, Iran and in some form Hamas will all still be around when the dust settles.

Very Likely, I think. Agreeably my view is deeply shaped by taking part in the last two decades of US foreign policy, but I don't see how they separate HAMAS from the civilian population... and... attempting to re-establish control over Gaza, while justifiable, is gonna be freaking awful.

The jury is still out on how “brilliant” it has been to pick a fight with everyone. Has been for decades.

Israel didn't "pick a fight with everyone". Lebanese Hizballah started launching rockets into Israel on October 8th after declaring publicly how thrilled they were with the success of HAMAS' operation. The Houthis started shooting at Israel and at vessels going through the Red Sea. Shia militia groups in Syria and Iraq started shooting at Israel, thrilled with the success of All This. Eventually Iran started shooting missiles at Israel, in addition to funding, equipping, enabling, assisting, and having their extended networks do it from outside of Iran proper.

They picked a fight with Israel, and it looks to have been a major strategic error for them to have done so.