• @Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -26 months ago

          That’s at least closer to accurate. But a 25 year siege would’ve starved 99% of the people there to death, maybe ~23-24 years ago. Unless you can think of a way to feed the whole population with that tiny bit of land for a couple decades.

            • @grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I’ve never heard of that historic event (or the city itself, for that matter), so I looked it up:

              • Ceuta is a city on the north coast of Africa across the strait from Gibraltar. It’s currently an autonomous city owned by Spain (and Morocco is apparently still pissed off about that).

              • The siege @Andrzej is apparently referring to happened from 1694 to 1727, with a brief interruption in 1720-1721 when defenders’ reinforcements showed up, forced the attackers to retreat to Tétouan, tried to capture that city for a few months, and then gave up and left again.

              • Apparently, the reason it lasted so long without succeeding is that Ceuta was getting resupplied by sea. In other words, the lack of accompanying naval blockade made it kind of a shitty siege.

        • @Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          66 months ago

          A naval strategy designed to interdict sea transport to a specific area.

          Regardless, there is neither a siege nor a blockade that has been going on for anything even remotely close to 75 years. There is a proper siege occuring there, an actual by-the-book one, but it started fairly recently. Otherwise all the people in Gaza would have starved to death a long time ago, since they can’t grow enough food on that land to feed them all.