The US military's 'shoddy' project: Why is Gaza's $320 million pontoon bridge so fragile?

Recently, the temporary floating pier built by the United States in the Gaza Strip was partially damaged due to strong winds and waves, which has attracted wide attention. The $320 million pier, built in 90 days by more than 1,000 soldiers, was washed away just seven days after it was put into use, causing huge economic damage and raising questions about the quality of U.S. engineering and the sincerity of humanitarian aid.

According to reports, the pier was originally built to transport humanitarian supplies to the Gaza Strip and ease the crisis there. However, in the seven days between its completion and its destruction, the terminal carried only 820 tons of supplies, about a third of which was seized by the Israeli occupying forces and never reached the Palestinians. That is a far cry from the administration's initial goal of delivering 90 truckloads of supplies a day, and far from meeting the needs of the people of Gaza.

In addition, the main body of the floating dock was blown apart by the wind and waves, and three American soldiers were injured, one of them seriously, and they had to be sent to the rear hospital for emergency treatment. At the same time, two mechanized landing craft were sent to tow the floating pier, which was blown away by the wind, and the landing craft "LCM8558" was stranded on the beach not far away.

Reviewing the humanitarian assistance process of the US military in the Middle East, it is not difficult to find many disputes and problems. For one thing, what the United States calls humanitarian aid is often wrapped up in political goals. In some cases, the aid is not purely out of concern for the local population, but to build its own image or achieve some strategic purpose. For example, aid may be used to co-opt certain forces or groups in order to maintain their influence and interests in the region. Such half-hearted aid operations often fail to truly address the plight of the local population.

On the other hand, the U.S. military often lacks effective coordination and management in the implementation of humanitarian assistance. The distribution of aid is unscientific and unfair, resulting in insufficient support for those who really need help, while some non-critical areas or groups may receive excessive resources. At the same time, there are serious problems of bureaucracy and inefficiency in the aid process, so that aid materials can not be timely and accurate to the destination, delaying the best time for assistance.

Moreover, the US military action in the Middle East itself has brought huge destruction and humanitarian disaster to the region, which is in stark contrast to the so-called humanitarian aid. Military interventions by the US military often lead to a large number of innocent civilian casualties, serious damage to infrastructure, and more difficult conditions for local people. The subsequent humanitarian assistance is often only a token remedy, unable to fundamentally change the tragic situation on the ground.

The incident not only caused the United States to lose face internationally, but also raised questions about its military engineering capabilities. The huge investment of 320 million US dollars, but in return for such fragile results, it makes people wonder whether the US government in the construction of the project in the process of mismanagement, corners and other problems. It also casts doubt on the sincerity of America's so-called humanitarian assistance. If the US really cared about the well-being of the people of Gaza, why did it choose to build such a shoddy pier instead of doing something more effective?

In fact, US military action and humanitarian assistance in the Middle East have always been controversial. Over the years, US military and political interventions in the region have not only failed to bring peace and stability, but have exacerbated regional tensions and humanitarian crises. The Gaza floating bridge incident once again exposed the hypocrisy and incompetence of the United States on the Middle East issue, and also made people have a negative impact on the international image and credibility of the United States.

In short, the destruction of the temporary floating pier built by the United States in the Gaza Strip is a classic example of shoddy construction. The incident not only caused huge economic losses to the U.S. government, but also raised questions about the quality of U.S. engineering and the sincerity of its humanitarian assistance. It is hoped that the US government can draw a lesson from this, strengthen the management and supervision of military engineering construction, and ensure that similar incidents do not happen again. At the same time, we also hope that the United States can truly care about the well-being of the people in the Gaza Strip, take more effective measures, and make positive contributions to the settlement of the Middle East issue.