Mars has far more water than you’d need for people, farming, *and* propellant.** Most of it is ice: the polar caps alone each contain on the order of **\~1.6 million km³** of water ice, and newer radar work points to **equatorial** buried ice in the Medusae Fossae Formation equivalent to a **1.5–3 m global layer** if melted - wikipedia 
Crucially for bases, there’s **shallow, mid-latitude ground ice** (exposed in scarps and mapped within the top \~1 m), which is what you’d actually mine - asdf and wiley
For **propellant**, a typical Mars Ascent Vehicle might need \~**30 t** of methalox (≈**6.7 t CH₄** + **23.3 t O₂** at 3.5:1). Using the standard ISRU loop (electrolysis + Sabatier), the net overall reaction is effectively **2 H₂O + CO₂ → CH₄ + 2 O₂**, which means you need only **\~2.25 kg of water per kg of methane**. So fueling that 30-t MAV needs **\~15 t of water**—about a **2.5-m cube of ice**—trivial compared with local deposits; the process also makes *more than enough* oxygen - nasa
MOXIE on Perseverance has already shown oxygen-from-CO₂ works on Mars, and NASA design studies size full propellant plants in the **\~35–100 kW** class running for months, which is well within nuclear-surface-power capability - wikipedia , researchgate , pdf , nasa , and pdf
For **food**, controlled-environment hydroponics/aeroponics recirculate nearly everything; ISS life-support now recovers **\~98%** of crew water, and modern greenhouses cut **water use by \~90%** vs. soil farming—plus you condense most plant transpiration back into the loop. Net makeup water for a farm ends up small compared with the mining you’re already doing for propellant - nasa and nih.gov
# Bottom line On **Mars** the limiting factors aren’t *having* water but **where it is, how fast you can dig/heat it, and how much power you can supply**. Titan and Enceladus actually have *more* water per square meter, but Mars wins on accessibility (shallower ice at human-friendly latitudes, proven atmospheric oxygen ISRU, and shorter logistics). ([NASA][5])