The war in Gaza isn’t just a war—it’s a broadcast. It’s not fought only with drones, rockets, and tanks; it’s fought with cameras, livestreams, NGO reports, tweets, and carefully packaged images of suffering. This is not HUMINT anymore. HUMINT—human intelligence—was once the domain of field operatives, agents in trench coats slipping information across park benches, spies cultivating informants, analysts pouring over secrets. Today’s human intelligence is first-person, raw, shot on phones, uploaded in real time. It’s the crying child in the rubble, the mother screaming under the sirens, the fighter holding a GoPro. It’s intelligence that no longer stays in secret files but floods your feed.
And that intelligence doesn’t just inform. It entertains. It horrifies, yes, but it captivates, compels, and keeps you scrolling. It’s been transmuted into something else: HUMENT—human entertainment. Suffering is no longer just witnessed; it’s consumed.
The Age of the Soft Spook
We like to pretend the people on the ground in Gaza—the journalists, the aid workers, the NGO staff—are neutral witnesses. They wear their PRESS ests, their Red Cross logos, their moral shields. But they’re not neutral, and they know it. They are narrative operators, soft spooks who work not for intelligence agencies but for causes, donors, and public opinion. Their footage is intelligence, but not for generals—it’s for audiences. Their testimonies shape narratives more powerfully than any secret memo. They curate reality, deciding which bodies matter, which angles resonate, which images will go viral.
This is not to say they’re liars. The suffering they capture is real. The children buried in rubble are real. The hunger is real. But so is the editorial hand. So is the calculation. So is the understanding that horror must be packaged to break through the noise. NGOs need funding. Media outlets need clicks. Activists need engagement. The suffering is both truth and weapon.
Israel knows this game. Hamas knows this game. Every modern actor knows this game. What was once HUMINT—the intelligence of the human experience—has become HUMENT: intelligence crafted, edited, scored with violins, and pushed into the bloodstream of the world to generate not just awareness but feeling. And feeling is power.
That’s Entertainment
There’s an old Broadway song, “That’s Entertainment,” celebrating how the stage can make even heartbreak beautiful. Swap out the lyrics, and you have Gaza. The crying child, the keening mother, the drone shot over flattened neighborhoods—these are the verses. The violins swell, the captions roll, and the world watches. Horror itself is the show. War has become theater, atrocity has become content.
This isn’t hyperbole. Think of the Nayirah testimony in 1990—the Kuwaiti “incubator babies” narrative that helped launch a war. It was theater: scripted, coached, delivered to Congress, swallowed by the media, later exposed as PR. That was the prototype. Gaza is the full Broadway production. Every image, every video, every testimony serves as both evidence and advertisement, both witness and spectacle. The razzle-dazzle isn’t a distraction—it’s the product.
Even Israel’s denials have production value. Every press conference, every IDF-released video of a tunnel or a weapons cache is staged with its own kind of narrative flair. Both sides are performing, because in a war fought under cameras, the performance is as important as the battle.
Famine as Strategy, Mercy as Theater
Hunger isn’t an accident in Gaza—it’s a tactic. In warfare, starving an enemy has always been a strategy. It’s not new. From medieval sieges to World War II blockades, cutting off resources forces surrender. Today, the blockade of Gaza, the restrictions on fuel and aid, the throttling of supply lines—they are not incidental. They are doctrine. They are designed to make resistance unsustainable, to break morale, to force Hamas (and by extension Gaza) to yield.
This is brutal. It’s also logical. War is not about fairness; it’s about leverage. And famine is leverage that works slowly, relentlessly, without the need for a single bullet. Civilians suffer. Children suffer. The images of their suffering circle the globe. But in the cold math of war, that suffering is a pressure point.
Israel doesn’t frame it this way. It cites security, the need to stop Hamas from using aid for rockets. Hamas, on the other side, thrives on the suffering as a rallying cry. The civilians are caught in the middle—starved not just of food but of agency.
And this is where the idea of mercy enters. Mercy, in war, isn’t granted to the strong. It’s granted to the defeated. It comes only after surrender.
The Knight and the King
Imagine the classic trope: two knights in an arena, swords drawn, battling under the watchful eye of the king. One knight is stronger. The other, bloodied, falls to the ground. The stronger knight pauses, waiting. The king holds his thumb poised. If the fallen knight surrenders, there’s a chance for mercy. If he does not—if he spits, defies, keeps swinging—then the king must decide, and the thumb turns down.
This is Gaza. Israel is the stronger knight. Gaza, through Hamas, refuses to yield. Defiance is its strategy, its pride, its identity. But mercy does not come to the defiant. Mercy comes only after surrender.
Germany surrendered in 1945. Japan surrendered in 1945. They didn’t negotiate conditions; they capitulated. And only after that did the rebuilding begin. Had they fought to the last, they would have been annihilated completely. Gaza, like the Black Knight in Monty Python, fights on even as its limbs are hacked away, shouting “I’ll bite your legs off!” The defiance is brave, but it is also suicidal.
Why No One Comes to Save Gaza
Here’s the part that no one wants to admit: Gaza has been abandoned by its supposed friends. The Arab world mouths its support but sends no armies, no jets, no meaningful intervention. Egypt keeps Rafah mostly shut. Jordan protects its own borders. The Gulf states write checks for reconstruction but avoid confrontation. Iran provides weapons and rhetoric but uses Gaza as a pawn in its own game with Israel.
Two billion Muslims. Half a billion Arabs. And Gaza stands alone. The Muslim world loves Gaza as a slogan, not as a cause worth dying for. The West loves Gaza as a protest sign, not as a war worth fighting. Even the students chanting “Free Palestine” on campus are performing solidarity, not delivering it. The cold reality is that the world bets on Israel. It has tech, nukes, intelligence, and a global diaspora with influence. Gaza has suffering, and suffering is not enough.
The Only Endgame
This is the cruel logic: wars end when one side surrenders. Gaza has not surrendered. Israel has no reason to stop. The world has no will to intervene. The siege will continue. The bombs will fall. The famine will tighten. The suffering will mount, and the cameras will roll.
This isn’t advocacy for destruction. It’s a recognition of how wars work. The longer Hamas clings to resistance without the power to win, the more Gaza bleeds. The world may weep, may post, may march—but the bombs do not stop for tears. Mercy, if it comes, will only come after surrender.
HUMINT into HUMENT
And through all of this, the suffering is not only lived—it is broadcast. It is filmed, edited, scored, and consumed. The world watches Gaza not as a war but as a series. Season after season, episode after episode, atrocity after atrocity. Truth becomes secondary to narrative. Human pain becomes content. HUMINT collapses into HUMENT. Intelligence turns into entertainment. Horror turns into spectacle.
The curtain rises every day. The violins swell. The thumb hangs in the air. And the show goes on.
tl;dr
The provided text argues that the conflict in Gaza has transformed into a spectacle, where traditional human intelligence (HUMINT), once covert, has become "HUMENT" or human entertainment, openly broadcast through real-time footage of suffering. This transformation means that journalists and aid workers act as "soft spooks," shaping narratives for public consumption rather than for intelligence agencies. The author contends that warfare tactics, such as famine, are intentionally leveraged, and mercy is only granted after surrender, which Gaza, through Hamas, has not done. Ultimately, the text suggests that the world has largely abandoned Gaza, watching its suffering as a performance, with little will for meaningful intervention.
Share this post