It hasn't returned, because it never went away in the first place, whether it be the Balkan wars in the 90s or the Chechnya war, or the post gulf war sanctions, starvation has always been used as a weapon and will continue to be a very inhumane yet effective weapon
Reminds me of Somalia in black hawk down when they were raiding UNRWA food convoys. I feel like you need to have a solid amount of boots on the ground and to make sure the warlords don’t take the aid
I mean, I would argue that it is one of the most humane weapons of all used. Why would a bomb or a gun be more humane? Starvation is a threat, and one can choose to respond to it in different ways. Want to suffer through it? Your choice. But you don't have to. You don't have the same choice when it comes to bombs and guns, you don't really have a choice. It is very effective weapon, which is why it is used. Very cheap usually. As the saying goes, the army can't march on an empty stomach. If one side enforces a blockade or similar, usually you don't have to suffer through it as you have the choice of surrender. If you don't want to, then yes, it is horrible... but, that is the cost of defiance. At the very least, I would not call it less humane than any other weapon, nor a war crime. War itself is a crime, and using hunger is no different from any other weapon. At least, when threatened with hunger, you usually have the option to surrender before anyone dies - which is not the case with most other weapons.
@@Wustenfuchs109I mean sieges were pretty effective now we call them sanctions. In the civil war there were stories of sieges and yeah eventually they walked out gave up their guns and got fed. Also fighting in urban environments is so deadly I can see your point why should an advisory have to provide water food and electricity just so the people that want to kill you can last longer. Also the IDF showed UNWRA boxes from Egypt with weapons in them when it was suppose to be humanitarian aid so I can see them not trusting some of the aid given which usually ends up in the soldiers hands and not the civilians.
It's much harder to prevent weaponizing starvation, since compared to all the other "taboo" weapons, all that is needed is inaction. To make your army use chemical weapons you need a lot of people willing to do horrible things to innocent people out of hate (scientists to make them, soldiers to transport them, fire them, politicians to approve it). To PREVENT famine you often need people willing to actively help the people they hate (someone must organize it, transport it, check it, and risk their lives in doing so). It's much easier to do nothing than to actively do something to harm others.
To prevent famine you need to see your enemies civilians as human. In places like the middle East very rarely is any of that population safe. Look at HAMAS starving its own people by stealing all the food aid and simply executing people who wont give it up. They use it as propoganda and very effectively this war (people forget they have done this at least 2 times before). So inhumanity is the root of the issue. Starvation is a slow death and people look like they are starving when they are. To stand by and watch that takes a sick person.
Our group helps people in South Africa. Many of us struggle ourselves, but still we fight to help those starving. The government is useless, greedy, and power hungry, and yet thousands of children are literally dying of starvation in the eastern cape and KwaZulu-Natal. We make pleas to get help from as many as possible. We ourselves struggle, but we go out and help those that struggle. It's disgusting how much people talk and do little to put their money where there mouth is. They take little to no action yet always talk about it. Maybe because they giving the money to the wrong people. Bit we keep going forward and keep trying.
No it's not lol it's just that people promote the Gaza news unlike Sudan that had way it way worse like many other country but now one cares about them because the Jews have nothing to do with it @@NearQuasar
Even without being used as a specific tactic, war will inherently disrupt food production, supply, and transportation. The war in Ukraine affects global food production and supply. As one of the world’s bread baskets Ukraine isn’t going to starve, but world food production and supply will be affected.
That's part of a core issue: the fight to eliminate world hunger has made a great many countries reliant on an uninterrupted global infrastructure just to feed their people. Any hiccup and you have major issues. Estimated deaths from famine from the disruption during covid were estimated to go as high as 150 million if the lockdown measures went on for much longer.
@@a.b3203That’s why our populations are collapsing. All these countries that had eugenics programs are failing now. 💀 Heavy handed govt intervention into other breeding behaviors of a population.
100+ million Chinese would starve if they were blockaded. They import 80% of agricultural inputs. Some people put it at half a billion after a 2 year blockade.
As much I would like to see that I believe they have a lot of food/grain ect in reserve for that exact reason although there’s questions about the quality/status of it and their ability to effectively distribute it
@@CosmicWanderer20 the point is a thought experiment, like "if you had to commit murder how would you get away with it" type of thing. To see if things would go as you expect them to, not that you want to murder nor that you want famine, just to try predicting events and see if youre right.
He's on my shit list now! Dreamcast was legendary for those of us who had the pleasure and privilege to play it the year it came out. They beat Sony to 128bit. It is not "best forgotten"! It will always reign superior for those of us who knew what was up!
Let's just not make it the standard.Every country is at war with someone,whether with guns or espionage wise.All you have to do is get the right kind of biological tools(INsects,plant diseases) and money and polital will and the entire agricultural chain of the planet could grind to a halt,when that happens,well all of us Europeans and Americans would have a taste of the life of an average African,and I very much hope to avoid that
@@mechanicaldavid4827 ... Those farmers, the people of the land, the ones the armies were there to defend, the babies and the mothers, are snuffed out. Erased, as collateral damage, and that damage is always calculated, and carried out. Those who wave flags believe that these excuses for Evil are Accepted because they invented a vocabulary for what they do. They made it Popular Opinion. That is how aggressors act, reliably.
There's no accurate figures for NK. Anecdotally people who've escaped over the past 20yrs have described what they saw/lived through & it wasn't pretty. There's articles written by & interviews with escapees, if you're interested in their specifics
@@nolongerblocked6210eh I’d be wary of “defectors” as their is and has been an economy of defectors making up ridiculous s**t to say on cable TV. Naomi park is a perfect example, she lies about just about everything, also hugely misrepresents the whole situation as “communism is a terrible system that makes people starve” and not the reality that America has been using starvation as a weapon of war on a singular people since the late 80s
Simon did mention an annual starvation figure of 75 million famine deaths if I heard right. That's seems crazy high but if that is correct it seems plausible that NKs death toll may be a part of that larger sum.
As an Ethiopian watching this video, the part where we now call western tigrai was not historically part of tigrai. Rather it had a more complicated background with local agaws kunamas amharas and tigrayans intermingled forming a micro chasm of culture called semein
As far as I understand it still is majority Tigrayan, no? Displacing them is still a form of ethnic cleansing? And isn't Ethiopia fighting Fano now? In that case why are Amhara still allowed to displaced the Western Tigrayans?
@@3haAD900 yes i agree, whatever happened in the past is the past and no one must condemn people who just live their regular life now. It is not objectively right.
Yall hungry cause I funded the armed group that took away your food? How about you pay me a bajillion dollars and I’ll give you less than the required calories per day
Oh he’s already here but it’s not God doing it it’s a bunch of egotistical people using some old dusty book and fulfilling prophecy eager to kill us all not themselves for their “messiah” (more like dictator with a unhealthy helping of narcissism).
Most of the examples of recent weaponization of hunger were performed by non-state actors. Like many, if not most of the global conflicts, non-state and proxy organizations are becoming the largest instruments in global conflict. These groups are not held to any international treaties or agreements, and, as mentioned, it's cheap and easy for them to use hunger to further their goals.
Can you give examples? Starvation only works nowadays if you can chase away all the NGO/aid deliveries, which is not as easy for non-state/proxy actors as a state actor who can assert legal control over a region. (As example, I never heard of the Tamil Tigers enforcing food blockades, but the Sri Lankan army sure did, because they did not trust the UN/NGOs/etc not to take sides)
I has changed quite dramatically a few times. Prior to the industrial revolution the outcome of war, with a few exceptions, was mostly down to availability of manpower, which in turn was mostly restricted by arable land. WW1 was arguably a huge turning point where it was not necessarily the population size that dictated a state's military power but rather its industrial capacity; the more tanks and airplanes you could produce during a war economy, the higher chance of winning the war you had. This is why Germany, while albeit sporting a fairly respectable population but not overwhelmingly so, could take on the rest of Europe's might combined and even put up a formidable fight for a couple of years even when the USA joined in on the action. During the 2020's we are once again seeing a shift in how war is waged with autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons such as drones are again and again showing their importance on the battlefield. This is one of the reasons why Ukraine could put up any defense what so ever against the, on paper, much mightier Russian navy. Drones are comparatively significantly cheaper than their traditional counter part, which upends the traditional playing field of war economies of decades past. This demonstrates that in the coming decades industrial output capacity, while still important, can be overcome by a seeming underdog state if they possess the technological means to deploy drones which means they get an upper hand in how much military might they can deploy for a given industrial capacity.
Things we're bringing back in the 20's: -Famine -Soviet Union But for real it's crazy that the world could end famine and is just like "nah, we're good"
Appreciate the info Simon, this was the final push I needed to stop sitting around and help with solutions instead of just accepting it. Got some info from the fam, and will be donating to World Vision. Thanks to you and the writers for the great work 🙂
Famine is a thing of the past for most countries. If your country is seen as one of those "First World"* you don't need to worry. When a famine happens everything and everyone is a target. So rich have a vested interest on keeping you fed. *Misleading statement first world means USA and its allies. Second world means USSR and its allies. Third world means non aligned. Switzerland is a third world nation.
Depending on the UN for anything is naive. Stop acting like governments diametrically opposed to each other will join hands and agree on anything with actual enforcement mechanisms. Stop being foolish.
The book 'price wars' goes into the economic and market incentives of famine on commodity prices. Traders exploit these fluctuations giving a very lucrative incentive for wars. With market mechanisms even exploiting the famine and lack.
What about using your population's suffering as a tool of pressure, intentionally making it worse, and always using your meager resources on rockets and tunnels first and medicine and water second?
@@nolongerblocked6210there was enough to eat in Gaza before Hamas burned down the greenhouses and Egypt shut their boarder to Gaza before Israel did. There fixed it for you
What? If the rich never started giving food and medical care to Africa, they wouldn't be the shit show they are now. This is what happens when wealthy liberals pretend to be saviors.
The global south are wrecking sea trade, so far. If fertilizers do not come out of Russia, predicted 1-4 B billion will starve! So explain how this is the riches fault?
At around the 5:00 minute mark you claim that the IPC places 1.1 million people in Gaza in the famine category but this is incorrect. Their analysis currently as I am writing only provides a scenario of imminent famine. It did not state that the current conditions, at the time it made its analysis, would constitute a famine but rather that if nothing is done to improve the humanitarian aid status in the region then a famine would be imminent. However, Gaza wouldn't currently meet the threshold outlined for it to be officially categorized in a famine. Now it may turn out that a famine is unfolding when the IPC issues its next analysis in June I believe, but it is inaccurate now to say that the IPC has already categorized the 1.1 million people in Gaza as in a famine.
I am among those 1.19 million people facing severe famine in the world, i thought you're aware of my situation, UN failed the world, it became a joke, ADD Uganda the worst place on East Africa, many suffering for human being to survive normal, tremendous challenging like financial crisis and unemployment etc. especially the refugees who flee away from their countries like me, thank you Simon for highlighting attention to the world.
That's because africa repeatedly refuses to take the advice of the UN literally all the time Because they don't like being told what to do by Is who they consider former colonizers They repeatedly Help when it's offered. So no, that isn't the UN's fault.That's your fault your people's fault for refusing help Swallow your pride except the help and your nation's will prosper. And how about moving out of the shitting parts of Africa were nothing grows at all? And move a little bit closer to where the food grows That would literally help so much
Food has been a weapon since the beginning of time and will continue to be one. From the sieges of ancient cities and medieval fortresses all the way to the modern concept strategy of feeding North Korean forces to make them surrender or turn against their "Great Leader." It is not a quick or gentlemanly method of war, but it is cruelly effective. Food is a logistical resource, and in war it is necessary to deny your enemy any resources that will allow them to continue resisting your objectives. One of the greatest examples that I can think of is Sherman's March to the Sea during the American Civil War. The campaign targeted not only military targets, but civilian farms, plantations, railroad networks, and civilian population centers. General Sherman is famously quoted as saying "War is cruelty. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over." In World War 2, the Siege of Leningrad was nearly a German victory because Army Group North had starved the garrison and civilian population to the point they were eating sawdust or in more desperate times...they're own frozen dead. Starvation is an effective weapon because it turns one of the enemy's greatest needs into a liability. Soldiers need food to remain combat effective. Civilians need food to maintain a wartime industry. Politicians want to keep people from starving to keep morale high on both the front line and the home front. For a starving army, the size of your force can become a new enemy, as large armies stranded in regions that cannot sustain them or are unable to be resupplied by their superiors, will often choose to surrender over starving to death. Rebels will find their ideals waver in the sight of starving civilians, or their own empty bellies. Even the Taliban made sure to be seen giving out bread in Kabul after the U.S. withdrawal. Food is a necessity for life, and that necessity makes it both a tool and a weapon. The only limiting factor is the mind of the person wanting to harness it. Will they use the power of a land flowing with milk and honey to rise to power, or will they set the fields of their enemies ablaze before their very eyes as they cower behind walls and towers? Will trucks and planes and ships bearing food risk everything to come to the aid of the starving, or will those same shipments be targeted by those who want the starving people to suffer just a little bit more in the hopes that they cave?
One of the barely known champs at this way of war in the modern age are the Nigerians: They put the kibosh on the Biafran rebellion back in the 1960s not by fighting the separatists so much (they were having some trouble with this) as a blockade of outside aid and burning their farms down. Nobody really knows how many died from the resulting food shortages, but ballpark is in the hundreds of thousands to millions.
*Completely unrelated to the subject matter at hand* You're the fucking man Big Simon, your videos are keeping me going these days. I was like man I hope there's a new video on there today and sure enough
Major opposition to the ban on the use of starvation as a weapon will likely come from within the UN Security Council itself. Unless it is backed by action up to and including forcibly extracting the leaders who make use of it from wherever they are in the world, I can't see it working.
So it won't happen for the same reason that it never happens, the council members literally just veto the other part, so the UN is useless as per usual xP
Sega is a Japanese GAMING company. Meaning it does not deserve any respect. Japanese gaming companies are known to "abuse" copyright laws because of Japans egregious copyright laws. Nintendo has sent cease and desist notices to free mods made for Garrys Mod that added Nintendo owned "property".
@@anotherbacklog I did not blame Sega. I blame Japanese government for making laws like that. Just because they haven't done it does not mean they won't. They have the laws.
Fk is like Medieval time when a city could be surrounded by troops, and they had back up coming from somewhere or death by hunger or plague were big issues. Or worst examples like Masada where well things turn even darker
The term ”war crime” has just lost its meaning. There is countries which just dont care about rules and there is basicly nothing we can do about it. They can play dirty games while we are following the rules which is just bad for us. Sad world we live in.
Why do the westerners never talk about famines caused by the British. It's always the same regurgitation of Mao and Stalin as if Churchill didn't starve millions to death. Same with Queen Victoria
also I feel like our morality has switched from "using hunger as a TOW IS bad" to most of our leaders being willing to use that excat tool without the citizens absolutely revolting.
Not to mention that large parts of the human population live in areas that are physically incapable of sustaining the local human population... literally ANY instability can cause famine. Even without an outright war, the disruption of transportation can cause some regions, particularly those in central Africa, to fall into famine, then you ad conflict on top of that and the result is inevitable. Eliminating world hunger is a noble goal, but ultimately a futile one. Hell, people starve to death in developed countries because of the unattainability of food.
7:27 "food is a weapon" is a sentence that is technically true in the same way as "you can bludgeon an infant to death with a plastic milk bottle". Earl Assz you monster.
Hunger as a weapon will never disappear as long as war exists. The thing about taboos with bio, chemical and nuclear weapons is that not everybody has access or can develop them. But hunger? Food denial? Absolutely anyone, as it is so easy and so cheap to accomplish, has access to it. Unfortunately, it will always rear its head around the corner in any type of conflict. Depressing? Sure. But it's a reality that should always keep in mind, and no amount of taboo'ing is gonna make people and poor countries no resort to it as a tactic when they could.
The weaponization of food and the use of starvation as a weapon has, unfortunately, been used throughout history as a means of subjugation and annihilation. Unlike conventional weapons, it is an insidious and even more atrocious form of warfare which deliberately targets civilian populations. I could cite countless cases throughout history of when it has been used. As an example, I will quote the words of a Cambodian who was forced to work the fields and survived the horrors of the Khmer Rouge regime: "Some armies kill with bullets, but the Khmer Rouge kill with rice. I had never seen so much rice which I was forbidden from eating."
Fundamentally I think the problem is that the tools of war have gotten more expensive. In eras of maneuver warfare starvation is too slow; better to blitz your enemy in days rather than spend months or even years sieging them. But successful maneuver warfare in the 21st century typically involves very expensive hardware like aircraft carriers and stealth bombers, which most of the world cannot afford. So when non-first world nations go to war, they often end up resorting to attrition warfare instead. Heck, even in the relatively first-world conflict in Ukraine, it's more or less devolved into attrition warfare with only minor bouts of maneuver warfare here and there. And in attrition warfare sieges are king. Which is why I believe the international community's efforts to curb weaponized hunger will be futile for the foreseeable future. Taking away one weapon will just see combatants resort to others or outright flout the rules. As long as there are conflicts there will be wars, and those wars _will_ be fought with effective weapons of one sort or another. Even if we somehow managed to stamp out hunger as a weapon, we'd just see other (possibly worse) tactics replace it. Unless the first world gets back in the business of intervening in the affairs of other nations when we feel like they're being "uncivilized" (which is a Pandora's Box all its own), or there's some kind of unforeseen innovation in the near future that swings the pendulum back towards maneuver warfare (which could also pose a host of problems since any such innovation would almost certainly empower bad actors to disrupt global security with asymmetric attacks), I don't think much will change unfortunately.
@@Welltron-3030might make a comeback if people keep abusing antibiotics and penicillin and people spreading and causing STDs to mutate into super variants
Part of the problem is that the places where this happens now are in unstable countries with fragile economies/infrastructure/wrecked environment and massive overpopulation. These countries are reliant on outside food supplies. Even countries at peace get wobbly now if something bad happens in another part of the world they rely on. (i.e. Sri Lanka when Ukraine war caused Russian/Ukraine grain shipments got interrupted) So whenever they have a problem, it doesn't take much to tip them over to famine conditions.
It's been used countless times, even by the self-proclaimed "good guys", like the blockade at the end of WW1 that caused over a million Germans to starve to death. And let's not even start on how the British and the famines in nations they subjugates, when much like the Soviet regime in the Holodomor, those regions had to EXPORT food so their oppressors could live in comfort while the people expected to produce the food starved by the millions, leading to a death toll caused by the British empire where ten million deaths amounts to a rounding error.
I understand the motivation but I'm not sure it's wise to put famine in the same box as nukes. It's not inconceivable that someone might weight the value of those two options directly with few alternatives and I'd rather see them attempt starvation than trigger nuclear war. Further more nuclear and chemical weapons are much better defined and constitutes hard lines while famine is kinda objective like ideally we avoid famine but almost any military action will have some effect on food supply it's not as clear of a devide it's not like a nuke either yes or no but with famine there's a whole spectrum of Mabey a little famine with that 😅 idk I just feel like it's the odd one out
Famine has never left as a weapon of war. Not a single conventional war in human history has ever not utilized famine and lack of food to their advantage
I still own that prized relic, don't link it with Smallpox Simon. But I definitely agree that Starvation should be eliminated. Nobody should be made to suffer unnecessarily.
The issue with making Famine a taboo compared to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical options comes down to two simple reasons... Firstly, and most importantly, Its effects wont spread beyond what its utilizer wants, you wont be on the receiving end of blow back by instigating famine on large or small targeted implementation. You want one city to starve, its simple to blockade/siege it. You want one country to suffer just prevent food shipments from reaching it while you bomb their own domestic sources. Meanwhile you help feed anyone you don't want to be affected that is nearby. The second reason is because its aftereffects are generally pretty easy to reverse up until death. While the youth have more long lasting effects, most adults will be able to rebound with time and have little overall concerns. Modern medicine can bring someone back from the brink of death due to starvation/malnutrition so after a conflict is over you bring in tons of aid and medical supplies and famine is over relatively quickly and its still cheaper than rebuilding cities. Famine as a weapon will continue. Not because people enjoy it, but because its more beneficial than Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical options while being just as threatening. A majority of China would starve within a year if its food imports where cut, that is something they are forced to take into consideration before any war with the western aligned nations and that alone could prevent another conflict from starting. Remove that threat, that's one less reason to stop a large nation from instigating a war. Its a very fine line between valuable deterrent and crimes against humanity. Even though its effects could wipe out entire nations its also something we have seen since the dawn of warfare itself and is just not as scary as those other options.
A complication inherent in this that I don’t think receives enough attention is the fact that there is a bit of a false equivalence between “weaponizing food” and other war crimes, such as biological warfare. While both are undeniably terrible and there are certainly MANY cases of intentional starvation, food insecurity can also arise as a matter of omission or negligence (or even inability to do otherwise), whereas it’s hard to imagine accidentally dropping anthrax over a civilian population. When undeniable wartime incentives push state actors to do the least they possibly can to uphold only a minimally acceptable level of food security, it is no wonder we still end up with starvation in almost every major conflict. Wars create food insecurity. Enforcing anti-starvation laws in the ICC is a noble goal that should be pursued, however it will need to be prosecuted differently between both the deliberate war-crime sense and the inability to maintain food security for their adversary (where it might fall into a jus ad bellum category such as: can you justifiably engage in a war where you can’t expect to maintain food security for your adversary’s civilians?).
I appreciate the information you provided us about so many cases of weaponized starvation. Except you barely got to mention Gaza a few seconds. I've heard you denounce Putin dozens of times in this and other videos, and I agree with that, but here you failed to denounce the current weaponized famine master: Benzion Mileikowsky, alias Benjamin Netanyahu.
It's stupid to suggest that the reason countries don't use nukes is because of a taboo. There are many practical reasons which are obviously more important....
Most people in America don't realize how fragile our food supply chain really is. I'm in the transportation industry. It's down right scary. I suggest start trying to be self sufficient if you can. We are in for a wild ride.
Bullets are expensive. Chemicals are cheaper. But starvation is cheapest and easiest. In fact, it’s kinda funny how everyone fears the blast from a nuke and not where their next meal will come from afterwards.
It never left, even a small interruption in the chain of logistics can cause disruption to food supplies ...not just to the conflict zone. Anyone who served in the military 60's,70's, 80's, and given training in NBC warfare defence was taught that chemicals and biological weapons would target food/ agricultural items such as crops and animals....no,no,children these weapons target every aspect in life. Dont call them weapons of mass destruction for nothing. YOU are not the only target. Novachok is an area denial weapon unlike older weapons this one doesnt dissipate,it remains in the environment...waiting.
It hasn't returned, because it never went away in the first place, whether it be the Balkan wars in the 90s or the Chechnya war, or the post gulf war sanctions, starvation has always been used as a weapon and will continue to be a very inhumane yet effective weapon
Want to win wars you have to be a dick
Reminds me of Somalia in black hawk down when they were raiding UNRWA food convoys. I feel like you need to have a solid amount of boots on the ground and to make sure the warlords don’t take the aid
@@bugtesties Indeed, securing logistical roadways is very difficult, and almost impossible when insurgencies are involved.
I mean, I would argue that it is one of the most humane weapons of all used. Why would a bomb or a gun be more humane? Starvation is a threat, and one can choose to respond to it in different ways. Want to suffer through it? Your choice. But you don't have to. You don't have the same choice when it comes to bombs and guns, you don't really have a choice.
It is very effective weapon, which is why it is used. Very cheap usually. As the saying goes, the army can't march on an empty stomach.
If one side enforces a blockade or similar, usually you don't have to suffer through it as you have the choice of surrender. If you don't want to, then yes, it is horrible... but, that is the cost of defiance.
At the very least, I would not call it less humane than any other weapon, nor a war crime. War itself is a crime, and using hunger is no different from any other weapon. At least, when threatened with hunger, you usually have the option to surrender before anyone dies - which is not the case with most other weapons.
@@Wustenfuchs109I mean sieges were pretty effective now we call them sanctions. In the civil war there were stories of sieges and yeah eventually they walked out gave up their guns and got fed. Also fighting in urban environments is so deadly I can see your point why should an advisory have to provide water food and electricity just so the people that want to kill you can last longer. Also the IDF showed UNWRA boxes from Egypt with weapons in them when it was suppose to be humanitarian aid so I can see them not trusting some of the aid given which usually ends up in the soldiers hands and not the civilians.
Hey, now Simon, the dreamcast should never be forgotten 😢
Lol bro Sega only has themselves to blame for it not succeeding.
@@xh2633 No, that isn't true at all. The mere announcement of the PS2 killed it.
@psychopompous3207 well SEGA dropped the ball with the Saturn and that led to the poor output of the dreamcast
It had the best OG Resident Evil game versions
Dreamcast was a fine machine. No kidding. I wish I kept mine somewhere
It's much harder to prevent weaponizing starvation, since compared to all the other "taboo" weapons, all that is needed is inaction. To make your army use chemical weapons you need a lot of people willing to do horrible things to innocent people out of hate (scientists to make them, soldiers to transport them, fire them, politicians to approve it). To PREVENT famine you often need people willing to actively help the people they hate (someone must organize it, transport it, check it, and risk their lives in doing so).
It's much easier to do nothing than to actively do something to harm others.
To prevent famine you need to see your enemies civilians as human. In places like the middle East very rarely is any of that population safe. Look at HAMAS starving its own people by stealing all the food aid and simply executing people who wont give it up. They use it as propoganda and very effectively this war (people forget they have done this at least 2 times before).
So inhumanity is the root of the issue. Starvation is a slow death and people look like they are starving when they are. To stand by and watch that takes a sick person.
Our group helps people in South Africa. Many of us struggle ourselves, but still we fight to help those starving. The government is useless, greedy, and power hungry, and yet thousands of children are literally dying of starvation in the eastern cape and KwaZulu-Natal. We make pleas to get help from as many as possible. We ourselves struggle, but we go out and help those that struggle. It's disgusting how much people talk and do little to put their money where there mouth is. They take little to no action yet always talk about it. Maybe because they giving the money to the wrong people. Bit we keep going forward and keep trying.
It never ceased to be, the news just ignored it, yemen, syria, sudan, afghanistan and alot more.
In Gaza it came on a massive scale compared to the others, so it warrants more attention in the eyes of news corporations.
No it's not lol it's just that people promote the Gaza news unlike Sudan that had way it way worse like many other country but now one cares about them because the Jews have nothing to do with it @@NearQuasar
@@NearQuasar i know.. i didnt want to state the obvious everybody is aware of whats going on there.. it has to stop asap
@@astro3666you tell them
@@NearQuasar Massive scale compared to Sudan?
Even without being used as a specific tactic, war will inherently disrupt food production, supply, and transportation. The war in Ukraine affects global food production and supply. As one of the world’s bread baskets Ukraine isn’t going to starve, but world food production and supply will be affected.
That's part of a core issue: the fight to eliminate world hunger has made a great many countries reliant on an uninterrupted global infrastructure just to feed their people. Any hiccup and you have major issues. Estimated deaths from famine from the disruption during covid were estimated to go as high as 150 million if the lockdown measures went on for much longer.
@@exnihiloadnihilum5094interfering in natural selection.
@@a.b3203That’s why our populations are collapsing. All these countries that had eugenics programs are failing now. 💀 Heavy handed govt intervention into other breeding behaviors of a population.
Almost as if creating dependants was a bad idea.
@@mr.z3664they pay for the food the fuck you mean dependants
100+ million Chinese would starve if they were blockaded. They import 80% of agricultural inputs. Some people put it at half a billion after a 2 year blockade.
As much I would like to see that I believe they have a lot of food/grain ect in reserve for that exact reason although there’s questions about the quality/status of it and their ability to effectively distribute it
@@Allen667sjja why on earth would you like to see that?
@@CosmicWanderer20 the point is a thought experiment, like "if you had to commit murder how would you get away with it" type of thing. To see if things would go as you expect them to, not that you want to murder nor that you want famine, just to try predicting events and see if youre right.
@@CosmicWanderer20 I got ripped off on Ali baba 😥
@@CosmicWanderer20 because I don’t like mainlander Chinese people, duh
Doing Sega dirty in the first minute 😂😂
Shit was hilarious
@@dandabear118...ly wrong.
Let see what Sega has to say.....oh yeah they have a sonic name! Fuck Sega they always sucked!
10:23 Simon farted
He's on my shit list now! Dreamcast was legendary for those of us who had the pleasure and privilege to play it the year it came out. They beat Sony to 128bit. It is not "best forgotten"! It will always reign superior for those of us who knew what was up!
Siege Warfare: I'M BACK EVERYONE!
Trebuchets coming back next?
On tank treads because Mental Omega
Siege warfare and the old ways of doing things is the most efficient it's why we used it till around WWII.
@@_Azulite_ They are called self-propelled artillery now i think
@@_Azulite_🤡 artillery is a direct outcome of the trebuchet. Good job on using a single neuron to make your opinion
It always was a great way to get what you want. People need food, populations need to be fed, armies need to eat to have the strength to fight.
Let's just not make it the standard.Every country is at war with someone,whether with guns or espionage wise.All you have to do is get the right kind of biological tools(INsects,plant diseases) and money and polital will and the entire agricultural chain of the planet could grind to a halt,when that happens,well all of us Europeans and Americans would have a taste of the life of an average African,and I very much hope to avoid that
10:23 Simon farted
Armies historically stripped resources such as food from the landscapes over which they marched or joined battle.
@@mechanicaldavid4827 ... Those farmers, the people of the land, the ones the armies were there to defend, the babies and the mothers, are snuffed out.
Erased, as collateral damage, and that damage is always calculated, and carried out.
Those who wave flags believe that these excuses for Evil are Accepted because they invented a vocabulary for what they do.
They made it Popular Opinion.
That is how aggressors act, reliably.
1:25 - Chapter 1 - Hungry ghosts
6:15 - Chapter 2 - Starvation weapon
11:40 - Chapter 3 - Global problems
15:20 - Chapter 4 - Famine in action
19:55 - Chapter 5 - Ray of hope
10:23 Simon farted
0:39 - SEGA Dreamcast shade
Can I just ask if starvation in North Korea since 1980 is considered? Do we have accurate estimates as this must surely be over 100,000?
In 2011 the US census bureau estimated it was 2-3 million
There's no accurate figures for NK. Anecdotally people who've escaped over the past 20yrs have described what they saw/lived through & it wasn't pretty. There's articles written by & interviews with escapees, if you're interested in their specifics
@@nolongerblocked6210eh I’d be wary of “defectors” as their is and has been an economy of defectors making up ridiculous s**t to say on cable TV. Naomi park is a perfect example, she lies about just about everything, also hugely misrepresents the whole situation as “communism is a terrible system that makes people starve” and not the reality that America has been using starvation as a weapon of war on a singular people since the late 80s
Simon did mention an annual starvation figure of 75 million famine deaths if I heard right. That's seems crazy high but if that is correct it seems plausible that NKs death toll may be a part of that larger sum.
As an Ethiopian watching this video, the part where we now call western tigrai was not historically part of tigrai. Rather it had a more complicated background with local agaws kunamas amharas and tigrayans intermingled forming a micro chasm of culture called semein
As far as I understand it still is majority Tigrayan, no? Displacing them is still a form of ethnic cleansing?
And isn't Ethiopia fighting Fano now? In that case why are Amhara still allowed to displaced the Western Tigrayans?
@@3haAD900 yes i agree, whatever happened in the past is the past and no one must condemn people who just live their regular life now. It is not objectively right.
Simon did make specific comment that it was a very complicated situation and for more details one should go to the previous videos already put out.
If I had part of my country called Semen, I would be in a hurry to rename it after Tiger Rays, too.
Blackrock: "Ok, but what if we were to go ahead and make it worse?"
they also want everyone to be gay and women to have penises.
Yall hungry cause I funded the armed group that took away your food? How about you pay me a bajillion dollars and I’ll give you less than the required calories per day
10:23 Simon farted
Wow. That attack on the Dreamcast, uncool! 😤😥
It works. We need food and water. If people could take away our oxygen they would make us pay for it.
More people should watch Spaceballs and The Expanse, they'd learn this real quick.
@@treelobster6137 Was just gonna mention The Expanse lol
Elon's workin' on it.
I remember learning about an ‘air tax’ in ‘Donald Duck and the Golden Helmet’.
@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis That's one of the Barks Ducks, IIRC.
Because it never left. War has, and always will, bring out the absolute worst in men.
War has no rule either. Only soft belly men would have dreamed up such a nonsense.
War never changes.
War brings out the worse in everyone not just men
You say this like humans aren't exhaustion hunters...
@@sarmeister1699 I am talking about those who officially declare and officially fight wars, an arena ruled overwhelmingly by men.
No need to do the Dreamcast dirty like that 😭
Exactly why I came here. The dreamcast was solid. 😂
Dream cast was a fever dream of a console
10:23 Simon farted
@@B3Band????? bro that’s just his fist hitting the desk why are you even commenting this in the first place 😭😭😭
watching this while eating my domino's pizza i ordered online and had delivered to my door in 24 minutes is... a vibe.
Pestilence, War, and now Famine. Here's hoping the Pale Horseman doesn't come next...
Dont worry. God isnt real.
Oh he’s already here but it’s not God doing it it’s a bunch of egotistical people using some old dusty book and fulfilling prophecy eager to kill us all not themselves for their “messiah” (more like dictator with a unhealthy helping of narcissism).
Great video, logical, precise and well researched!👍
Most of the examples of recent weaponization of hunger were performed by non-state actors. Like many, if not most of the global conflicts, non-state and proxy organizations are becoming the largest instruments in global conflict. These groups are not held to any international treaties or agreements, and, as mentioned, it's cheap and easy for them to use hunger to further their goals.
Can you give examples? Starvation only works nowadays if you can chase away all the NGO/aid deliveries, which is not as easy for non-state/proxy actors as a state actor who can assert legal control over a region. (As example, I never heard of the Tamil Tigers enforcing food blockades, but the Sri Lankan army sure did, because they did not trust the UN/NGOs/etc not to take sides)
War never changes
War, war never changes*
Atleast use the correct quote.
I has changed quite dramatically a few times. Prior to the industrial revolution the outcome of war, with a few exceptions, was mostly down to availability of manpower, which in turn was mostly restricted by arable land. WW1 was arguably a huge turning point where it was not necessarily the population size that dictated a state's military power but rather its industrial capacity; the more tanks and airplanes you could produce during a war economy, the higher chance of winning the war you had. This is why Germany, while albeit sporting a fairly respectable population but not overwhelmingly so, could take on the rest of Europe's might combined and even put up a formidable fight for a couple of years even when the USA joined in on the action.
During the 2020's we are once again seeing a shift in how war is waged with autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons such as drones are again and again showing their importance on the battlefield. This is one of the reasons why Ukraine could put up any defense what so ever against the, on paper, much mightier Russian navy. Drones are comparatively significantly cheaper than their traditional counter part, which upends the traditional playing field of war economies of decades past. This demonstrates that in the coming decades industrial output capacity, while still important, can be overcome by a seeming underdog state if they possess the technological means to deploy drones which means they get an upper hand in how much military might they can deploy for a given industrial capacity.
"things may get worse" 'may' your optimism gives me hope
On WarGraphics, the topic’s severe,
Famine’s return is the fear,
With views on the rise,
In the world’s hungry eyes,
Conflict and hunger draw near.
Things we're bringing back in the 20's:
-Famine
-Soviet Union
But for real it's crazy that the world could end famine and is just like "nah, we're good"
Critical topic and great coverage! Thank you!
Surely this will have no consequences on future generations. Do not look up the connections between schizophrenia rates and famines.
Appreciate the info Simon, this was the final push I needed to stop sitting around and help with solutions instead of just accepting it. Got some info from the fam, and will be donating to World Vision. Thanks to you and the writers for the great work 🙂
Glad to see this.
The shade thrown at the Dreamcast is wild.
"War is Hell" - William T. Sherman
The moment you see the upper class declaring famine is a thing of the past, you know its time to stock up.
Famine is a thing of the past for most countries. If your country is seen as one of those "First World"* you don't need to worry. When a famine happens everything and everyone is a target. So rich have a vested interest on keeping you fed.
*Misleading statement first world means USA and its allies. Second world means USSR and its allies. Third world means non aligned. Switzerland is a third world nation.
Depending on the UN for anything is naive. Stop acting like governments diametrically opposed to each other will join hands and agree on anything with actual enforcement mechanisms. Stop being foolish.
The UN started with great intentions. It is an absolute disgrace now, and has been for some time.
😂😂 how do you think we got to the point where you can type on that a screen lol
Hey man, you didnt have to diss the Sega Dreamcast like that.
Knowing humanity I don’t see famine going anywhere.
The book 'price wars' goes into the economic and market incentives of famine on commodity prices.
Traders exploit these fluctuations giving a very lucrative incentive for wars.
With market mechanisms even exploiting the famine and lack.
Never thought I would hear Sega Dreamcast slander on Warohraphics 😭
What about using your population's suffering as a tool of pressure, intentionally making it worse, and always using your meager resources on rockets and tunnels first and medicine and water second?
Exactly.
Precisely why I can't be bothered to give a crap about the Palestinians.
There was enough to eat in Gaza until Isreal decided to use food as a weapon, again
@@nolongerblocked6210there was enough to eat in Gaza before Hamas burned down the greenhouses and Egypt shut their boarder to Gaza before Israel did. There fixed it for you
@@lonniesmith352Hamas also rocketed the border crossings through which aid got through. Intentional suffering for international pressure.
Thanks for sharing.
How can you fight inaction (starvation)? It forces enemy to expand energy while costing you none.
Me watching this while eating a 2,000 calorie lunch:
hahaha XD
Sorry to ask but how fat are you?
The greed of the rich will doom the rest.
What? If the rich never started giving food and medical care to Africa, they wouldn't be the shit show they are now. This is what happens when wealthy liberals pretend to be saviors.
The global south are wrecking sea trade, so far. If fertilizers do not come out of Russia, predicted 1-4 B billion will starve! So explain how this is the riches fault?
You realize you are the rich?
At around the 5:00 minute mark you claim that the IPC places 1.1 million people in Gaza in the famine category but this is incorrect. Their analysis currently as I am writing only provides a scenario of imminent famine. It did not state that the current conditions, at the time it made its analysis, would constitute a famine but rather that if nothing is done to improve the humanitarian aid status in the region then a famine would be imminent. However, Gaza wouldn't currently meet the threshold outlined for it to be officially categorized in a famine. Now it may turn out that a famine is unfolding when the IPC issues its next analysis in June I believe, but it is inaccurate now to say that the IPC has already categorized the 1.1 million people in Gaza as in a famine.
War, war never changes.
Well, it does change, it adapts to become even more devastating.
If an enemy is too weak to fight through hunger... you've won.
I am among those 1.19 million people facing severe famine in the world, i thought you're aware of my situation, UN failed the world, it became a joke, ADD Uganda the worst place on East Africa, many suffering for human being to survive normal, tremendous challenging like financial crisis and unemployment etc. especially the refugees who flee away from their countries like me, thank you Simon for highlighting attention to the world.
That's because africa repeatedly refuses to take the advice of the UN literally all the time Because they don't like being told what to do by Is who they consider former colonizers They repeatedly Help when it's offered.
So no, that isn't the UN's fault.That's your fault your people's fault for refusing help Swallow your pride except the help and your nation's will prosper. And how about moving out of the shitting parts of Africa were nothing grows at all? And move a little bit closer to where the food grows That would literally help so much
Food has been a weapon since the beginning of time and will continue to be one. From the sieges of ancient cities and medieval fortresses all the way to the modern concept strategy of feeding North Korean forces to make them surrender or turn against their "Great Leader." It is not a quick or gentlemanly method of war, but it is cruelly effective. Food is a logistical resource, and in war it is necessary to deny your enemy any resources that will allow them to continue resisting your objectives. One of the greatest examples that I can think of is Sherman's March to the Sea during the American Civil War. The campaign targeted not only military targets, but civilian farms, plantations, railroad networks, and civilian population centers. General Sherman is famously quoted as saying "War is cruelty. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over." In World War 2, the Siege of Leningrad was nearly a German victory because Army Group North had starved the garrison and civilian population to the point they were eating sawdust or in more desperate times...they're own frozen dead.
Starvation is an effective weapon because it turns one of the enemy's greatest needs into a liability. Soldiers need food to remain combat effective. Civilians need food to maintain a wartime industry. Politicians want to keep people from starving to keep morale high on both the front line and the home front. For a starving army, the size of your force can become a new enemy, as large armies stranded in regions that cannot sustain them or are unable to be resupplied by their superiors, will often choose to surrender over starving to death. Rebels will find their ideals waver in the sight of starving civilians, or their own empty bellies. Even the Taliban made sure to be seen giving out bread in Kabul after the U.S. withdrawal. Food is a necessity for life, and that necessity makes it both a tool and a weapon. The only limiting factor is the mind of the person wanting to harness it. Will they use the power of a land flowing with milk and honey to rise to power, or will they set the fields of their enemies ablaze before their very eyes as they cower behind walls and towers? Will trucks and planes and ships bearing food risk everything to come to the aid of the starving, or will those same shipments be targeted by those who want the starving people to suffer just a little bit more in the hopes that they cave?
Starving people is easy. Finding insurgents is hard. If all your enemies drop, weakened. Pretty easy to just walk in. All wars are economic.
I have to come back to this story later, it just feels so wrong to eat dinner while watching this.
The only difference between a war crime and an atrocity is who lost the war. Drop the term war crime and make it an escalation agreement.
Do you EVER sleep Simon? So many Excellent channels.
he has writers tied up in his basement
Ai writers
One of the barely known champs at this way of war in the modern age are the Nigerians: They put the kibosh on the Biafran rebellion back in the 1960s not by fighting the separatists so much (they were having some trouble with this) as a blockade of outside aid and burning their farms down. Nobody really knows how many died from the resulting food shortages, but ballpark is in the hundreds of thousands to millions.
Because it’s effective. There, saved you 25 minutes.
It's been effective in Gaza.
Only 24:08 min would have been saved
@@salvatoreu-m7246only about 24mins 4secs
@@salvatoreu-m7246 🤓☝️
@@hydoffdhagaweyne1037it has been effective everywhere that it has been successfully used.
It's been said before, but it never left ...
*Completely unrelated to the subject matter at hand*
You're the fucking man Big Simon, your videos are keeping me going these days. I was like man I hope there's a new video on there today and sure enough
Major opposition to the ban on the use of starvation as a weapon will likely come from within the UN Security Council itself. Unless it is backed by action up to and including forcibly extracting the leaders who make use of it from wherever they are in the world, I can't see it working.
So it won't happen for the same reason that it never happens, the council members literally just veto the other part, so the UN is useless as per usual xP
You can't force a nation to feed another nation. Especially when they're at war. It's completely ridiculous.
@@robertw1800True, but you may be able to force a nation to not go out of their way to start famine.
War doesn’t have rules.. it has consequences for actions.
Ayo... none of the Sega slander will ve tolerated
Sega is a Japanese GAMING company. Meaning it does not deserve any respect. Japanese gaming companies are known to "abuse" copyright laws because of Japans egregious copyright laws. Nintendo has sent cease and desist notices to free mods made for Garrys Mod that added Nintendo owned "property".
Sega is pretty lax with its copyrights. Blaming Sega for Nintendo’s behavior is like calling Sonic Mario
@@anotherbacklog I did not blame Sega. I blame Japanese government for making laws like that. Just because they haven't done it does not mean they won't. They have the laws.
Fk is like Medieval time when a city could be surrounded by troops, and they had back up coming from somewhere or death by hunger or plague were big issues. Or worst examples like Masada where well things turn even darker
The term ”war crime” has just lost its meaning. There is countries which just dont care about rules and there is basicly nothing we can do about it. They can play dirty games while we are following the rules which is just bad for us. Sad world we live in.
No it has not. War crimes are just extremely common.
The only thing remotely approaching international law is the force projection of the US military, and they are, uh, quite complicit in all of this.
Simon, please repair the right elbow of your jacket. It's quite annoying to see stray bits hanging from it :)
In times of hunger, people think with their stomachs, not with their minds.
War, war never changes.
Why do the westerners never talk about famines caused by the British. It's always the same regurgitation of Mao and Stalin as if Churchill didn't starve millions to death. Same with Queen Victoria
Prove it?
yea when did that happen
I'm certain many soldiers would be happier chilling in their own nation and not out there on the front line in direct conflict.
also I feel like our morality has switched from "using hunger as a TOW IS bad" to most of our leaders being willing to use that excat tool without the citizens absolutely revolting.
Because of winning is everything
Not to mention that large parts of the human population live in areas that are physically incapable of sustaining the local human population... literally ANY instability can cause famine. Even without an outright war, the disruption of transportation can cause some regions, particularly those in central Africa, to fall into famine, then you ad conflict on top of that and the result is inevitable. Eliminating world hunger is a noble goal, but ultimately a futile one. Hell, people starve to death in developed countries because of the unattainability of food.
7:27 "food is a weapon" is a sentence that is technically true in the same way as "you can bludgeon an infant to death with a plastic milk bottle". Earl Assz you monster.
Hunger as a weapon will never disappear as long as war exists. The thing about taboos with bio, chemical and nuclear weapons is that not everybody has access or can develop them. But hunger? Food denial? Absolutely anyone, as it is so easy and so cheap to accomplish, has access to it. Unfortunately, it will always rear its head around the corner in any type of conflict. Depressing? Sure. But it's a reality that should always keep in mind, and no amount of taboo'ing is gonna make people and poor countries no resort to it as a tactic when they could.
Damn! As a species we really are terrifying! We would starve one and other just to get leverage over somebody else!
War crime designations do not matter at all. There are no consequences to nations or individuals, and the guilty know this.
The UN might need to do something about the actual punishment of war crimes if they want that classification to make governments think twice
While the US won't even allow war crimes investigators to enter their country, good luck getting smaller nations to comply.
Watching this while eating a big meal of chicken and rice hits different.
The weaponization of food and the use of starvation as a weapon has, unfortunately, been used throughout history as a means of subjugation and annihilation. Unlike conventional weapons, it is an insidious and even more atrocious form of warfare which deliberately targets civilian populations. I could cite countless cases throughout history of when it has been used. As an example, I will quote the words of a Cambodian who was forced to work the fields and survived the horrors of the Khmer Rouge regime:
"Some armies kill with bullets, but the Khmer Rouge kill with rice. I had never seen so much rice which I was forbidden from eating."
Fundamentally I think the problem is that the tools of war have gotten more expensive. In eras of maneuver warfare starvation is too slow; better to blitz your enemy in days rather than spend months or even years sieging them. But successful maneuver warfare in the 21st century typically involves very expensive hardware like aircraft carriers and stealth bombers, which most of the world cannot afford. So when non-first world nations go to war, they often end up resorting to attrition warfare instead. Heck, even in the relatively first-world conflict in Ukraine, it's more or less devolved into attrition warfare with only minor bouts of maneuver warfare here and there. And in attrition warfare sieges are king.
Which is why I believe the international community's efforts to curb weaponized hunger will be futile for the foreseeable future. Taking away one weapon will just see combatants resort to others or outright flout the rules. As long as there are conflicts there will be wars, and those wars _will_ be fought with effective weapons of one sort or another. Even if we somehow managed to stamp out hunger as a weapon, we'd just see other (possibly worse) tactics replace it.
Unless the first world gets back in the business of intervening in the affairs of other nations when we feel like they're being "uncivilized" (which is a Pandora's Box all its own), or there's some kind of unforeseen innovation in the near future that swings the pendulum back towards maneuver warfare (which could also pose a host of problems since any such innovation would almost certainly empower bad actors to disrupt global security with asymmetric attacks), I don't think much will change unfortunately.
Famine making a comeback.
My least favorite horseman of the apocalypse.
Idk, it's got to be pestilence for me
@@Welltron-3030might make a comeback if people keep abusing antibiotics and penicillin and people spreading and causing STDs to mutate into super variants
@@Welltron-3030Yeah samw
Part of the problem is that the places where this happens now are in unstable countries with fragile economies/infrastructure/wrecked environment and massive overpopulation. These countries are reliant on outside food supplies. Even countries at peace get wobbly now if something bad happens in another part of the world they rely on. (i.e. Sri Lanka when Ukraine war caused Russian/Ukraine grain shipments got interrupted) So whenever they have a problem, it doesn't take much to tip them over to famine conditions.
It's been used countless times, even by the self-proclaimed "good guys", like the blockade at the end of WW1 that caused over a million Germans to starve to death.
And let's not even start on how the British and the famines in nations they subjugates, when much like the Soviet regime in the Holodomor, those regions had to EXPORT food so their oppressors could live in comfort while the people expected to produce the food starved by the millions, leading to a death toll caused by the British empire where ten million deaths amounts to a rounding error.
Is there anywhere that human population is limited by food supply? If so, ending hunger has a complication.
How dare you sir! I spent many an afternoon playing Sonic Adventure and Nights into Dreams demos at Sears.
I understand the motivation but I'm not sure it's wise to put famine in the same box as nukes. It's not inconceivable that someone might weight the value of those two options directly with few alternatives and I'd rather see them attempt starvation than trigger nuclear war. Further more nuclear and chemical weapons are much better defined and constitutes hard lines while famine is kinda objective like ideally we avoid famine but almost any military action will have some effect on food supply it's not as clear of a devide it's not like a nuke either yes or no but with famine there's a whole spectrum of Mabey a little famine with that 😅 idk I just feel like it's the odd one out
What was the name of the aid ship attacked in the Red Sea?
10:23 Simon farted
Hell yeah didn't even skip a beat
My takeaway from this... Simon's sick Sega Dreamcaster burn!
You are on the wrong side of history.
Bio-weapons haven’t been used yet, he says…
Have you met 2020?
Famine has never left as a weapon of war. Not a single conventional war in human history has ever not utilized famine and lack of food to their advantage
Funny people are all up in arms about Gaza but I didn't hear anyone upset about Tigray or what's happening in Myanmar.
It's simple. The Nazis were far left and they never changed. The left hates jews and wants them all dead.
I still own that prized relic, don't link it with Smallpox Simon. But I definitely agree that Starvation should be eliminated. Nobody should be made to suffer unnecessarily.
The issue with making Famine a taboo compared to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical options comes down to two simple reasons... Firstly, and most importantly, Its effects wont spread beyond what its utilizer wants, you wont be on the receiving end of blow back by instigating famine on large or small targeted implementation. You want one city to starve, its simple to blockade/siege it. You want one country to suffer just prevent food shipments from reaching it while you bomb their own domestic sources. Meanwhile you help feed anyone you don't want to be affected that is nearby. The second reason is because its aftereffects are generally pretty easy to reverse up until death. While the youth have more long lasting effects, most adults will be able to rebound with time and have little overall concerns. Modern medicine can bring someone back from the brink of death due to starvation/malnutrition so after a conflict is over you bring in tons of aid and medical supplies and famine is over relatively quickly and its still cheaper than rebuilding cities. Famine as a weapon will continue. Not because people enjoy it, but because its more beneficial than Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical options while being just as threatening. A majority of China would starve within a year if its food imports where cut, that is something they are forced to take into consideration before any war with the western aligned nations and that alone could prevent another conflict from starting. Remove that threat, that's one less reason to stop a large nation from instigating a war. Its a very fine line between valuable deterrent and crimes against humanity. Even though its effects could wipe out entire nations its also something we have seen since the dawn of warfare itself and is just not as scary as those other options.
Look at 1985's Band Aid for Africa.
I think that was about Ethiopia then.
So you can see it's still around, shifting
around Africa and nearby areas. 😮
A complication inherent in this that I don’t think receives enough attention is the fact that there is a bit of a false equivalence between “weaponizing food” and other war crimes, such as biological warfare. While both are undeniably terrible and there are certainly MANY cases of intentional starvation, food insecurity can also arise as a matter of omission or negligence (or even inability to do otherwise), whereas it’s hard to imagine accidentally dropping anthrax over a civilian population. When undeniable wartime incentives push state actors to do the least they possibly can to uphold only a minimally acceptable level of food security, it is no wonder we still end up with starvation in almost every major conflict. Wars create food insecurity. Enforcing anti-starvation laws in the ICC is a noble goal that should be pursued, however it will need to be prosecuted differently between both the deliberate war-crime sense and the inability to maintain food security for their adversary (where it might fall into a jus ad bellum category such as: can you justifiably engage in a war where you can’t expect to maintain food security for your adversary’s civilians?).
I appreciate the information you provided us about so many cases of weaponized starvation. Except you barely got to mention Gaza a few seconds. I've heard you denounce Putin dozens of times in this and other videos, and I agree with that, but here you failed to denounce the current weaponized famine master: Benzion Mileikowsky, alias Benjamin Netanyahu.
Stuff like this makes me wonder what’s the point of the UN…
Why is the Dreamcast out here catching strays? 😂
Ummm,sega Dreamcast was great whistle boi. Idk where you've been lol but it kinda sucks that they didn't pursue it further
It's stupid to suggest that the reason countries don't use nukes is because of a taboo. There are many practical reasons which are obviously more important....
Those "practical reasons" are precisely why the use of nukes is a taboo.
Most people in America don't realize how fragile our food supply chain really is. I'm in the transportation industry. It's down right scary. I suggest start trying to be self sufficient if you can. We are in for a wild ride.
Bullets are expensive. Chemicals are cheaper. But starvation is cheapest and easiest. In fact, it’s kinda funny how everyone fears the blast from a nuke and not where their next meal will come from afterwards.
It never left, even a small interruption in the chain of logistics can cause disruption to food supplies ...not just to the conflict zone. Anyone who served in the military 60's,70's, 80's, and given training in NBC warfare defence was taught that chemicals and biological weapons would target food/ agricultural items such as crops and animals....no,no,children these weapons target every aspect in life. Dont call them weapons of mass destruction for nothing. YOU are not the only target. Novachok is an area denial weapon unlike older weapons this one doesnt dissipate,it remains in the environment...waiting.
I think we can all agree that totalitarian Communism is very good at starvation of their own populations. They succeeded at one thing!