The UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) reported on Saturday that over 50,000 children in the Gaza Strip are in urgent need of treatment for acute malnutrition, Anadolu Agency reports.

In a statement, the agency said that “with continued restrictions to humanitarian access, people in Gaza continue to face desperate levels of hunger.”

“Over 50,000 children require treatment for acute malnutrition,” it added.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    While I agree with your overall sentiment that Israeli actions outweigh HAMAS actions, this betrays a massive underestimation of global atrocities in the modern era. There have been a lot, most of which are not covered in a typical history class. Several go well into the millions.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history_(1946_to_1999)

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history_(21st_century)

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I was thinking just in terms of murdering children including the specific targetting of children (which the IDF has done both with snippers and by bombing playgrounds).

      In absolute terms of civilians, there were a number of worst atrocities, though in terms of percentage of the target population, not so much (possibly none at all but the Nazis, depending on what the the proportion between counted deaths and real deaths amongst the Palestinians is, since those whose corpses were not found and brought to Hospitals - i.e. those still buried in the rubble of the over 70% of Gaza building that were destroyed - were not counted, something which got worse after Israel destroyed almost all Palestinian Hospitals: the 40k deads are likely a significative underestimation and we might never know how significative that is because Israel does not allow independent UN observers to go check it).

      What’s really “special” in the genociding done by the Zionists is the number of children being killed, the percentage of the target population killed, the targetting of Hospitals and medical personnel, the targetting of Humanitarian Personnel (worst ever, according to the UN) and the targetting of Journalists.

      But, yeah, in absolute numbers of adults killed, things like Darfur and the Rwanda Genocide were worse.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t really see the point of singling out children. Murder is murder. Is killing a mother better than killing a child?

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The killing of children is widelly deemed the most immoral kind of murder, because there is no way it can be spinned as the killing of people guilty of anything or a self-defense: children are almost by definition innocent and incapable of defending themselves or overpower an adult, especially young ones - it takes a special kind of individual (namelly, sociopath or psychopath) to not only willingly take human life, but even that of those who are guaranteed innocent and totally incapable of defending themselves, much less attacking.

          This actually is reflected in the numbers of murder victims, were children are killed in a far, far lower proportion of their numbers than adults, and ditto for war casualties: adults on both sides usually will go a lot further in protecting children, even not their own, than they will for adults.

          It is surprising that in your moral framework you do not see the murder of children as an especially cold and calous kind of murder.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            I dunno, to me that’s a little arbitrary. Killing someone outside of self defense is just murder. So in your view is a school shooter worse than a mall shooter? Would you say murdering a handicapped stranger in a wheelchair who cannot defend themselves is worse than killing a healthy young adult stranger?

            To me it’s all just killing innocent people, their age or health is irrelevant. The law makes no difference as far as I’m aware, it’s all murder. I don’t see any point in differentiating murders based on the traits of the victims.

            • Aceticon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              The vast majority of people in this World see the killing of other human beings as something that covers a moral range, with something like self-defense when in direct danger for one’s life being at the more acceptable end of the scale and the killing of the young children at the more unacceptable end of the scale.

              This moral scale within murder also applies to the murderers themselves, which is why - as I pointed out earlier - in murder statistics and deaths in wars, children form a far smaller proportion of the deaths in comparison to the total of children, than people of other ages for in proportion to the total of people of those ages.

              So even if you yourself haven’t a heightened sense of revulsion for some murderes versus others (which, by the way, is not normal), even people who kill other people generally find the killing of children harder or even unnacceptable.

              In practice child murder is pretty well correlated with the highest levels of sociopathy and psychopathy, so a military which practices high levels of child murder has higher levels of psychopaths and sociopaths in their midst and leadership, and they have freer reign to act in psychopathic and sociopathic ways with no punishment - there are always some psychopaths and sociopaths in the military, but there being so many that child-murder is a generalized practice including specific targetting children - for example snipping children or bombing playgrounds - is incredibly rare.

              We saw this with the SS and the Nazis, and we see this with the IDF and the Zionists.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                3 months ago

                This seems a bit made up. Again, the law makes no difference.

                Regarding this moral scale, I disagree. I think the vast majority of the world sees it as binary. Murder bad. Self defense okay. Either/or, no sliding scale present. Do you have any sort of evidence?

                which is why - as I pointed out earlier - in murder statistics and deaths in wars, children form a far smaller proportion of the deaths in comparison to the total of children, than people of other ages for in proportion to the total of people of those ages.

                This is not sound. There are many reasons children could die in wars less, with evacuation from conflict zones being a big one. Similarly with crime, where things like gang violence will never target them due to them not being gang members.

                In practice child murder is pretty well correlated with the highest levels of sociopathy and psychopathy, so a military which practices high levels of child murder has higher levels of psychopaths and sociopaths in their midst

                This is not sound. You point out leadership in the very next line, and leadership absolutely makes a big difference. One correlation is not enough to draw such a conclusion when there are other factors.

                I’m academically inclined, personally, so I pay great attention to details and do not think with my feelings. So these details are important to me.