Even if they somehow were accurate, these numbers only cover the direct deaths from attacks, the totals you cite include all deaths from starvation and disease and more. The attacks on the hospital system and infrastructure and access to food will cause the ratio to get much much worse. Famine is indiscriminate.
I can’t find any source showing the context of the 30-35% claim from US Intel. I can’t even find a reliable source of the US estimate of how many fighters they have. The last public numbers from US intel in January had much more detail and said 20% incapacitated, not 20% dead. A jump to +30% of Hamas fighters dead now seems beyond implausible. Especially because USA has also said they don’t independently track deaths in the region, they rely on local numbers.
Different Hamas officials have made different claims about their losses, and all the sources seems vague. It’s been reported as 6000 - 8000 either lost (could be casualties including injured survivors not able to fight) or dead. And some of them deny the numbers entirely.
25-30K fighters, 20-30% killed, so at best ~10K down to ~5K, assuming their intel is correct. It’s very strange that the estimate of killed fighters is in percent and injuries is in absolute numbers. Doesn’t make me feel confident they got the context right of the numbers shared
I believe those are still from January, when the total number of deaths was 25,000. So if they are correct then that would result in a casualty ratio between 1.5:1 and 4:1
I’m not sure that matters, since the majority of military casualties are caused by the same side.
So for example, when evaluating the Iraq War you would compare Iraqi civilian to Iraqi military casualties. There is little point in looking at American civilian casualties.
Possibly, but the civilian-combatant casualty ratios so far seem to be in keeping with proportionality.
Even if they somehow were accurate, these numbers only cover the direct deaths from attacks, the totals you cite include all deaths from starvation and disease and more. The attacks on the hospital system and infrastructure and access to food will cause the ratio to get much much worse. Famine is indiscriminate.
I can only assess the numbers I have. If in the future they drastically change for the worse, then I will reassess.
I can’t find any source showing the context of the 30-35% claim from US Intel. I can’t even find a reliable source of the US estimate of how many fighters they have. The last public numbers from US intel in January had much more detail and said 20% incapacitated, not 20% dead. A jump to +30% of Hamas fighters dead now seems beyond implausible. Especially because USA has also said they don’t independently track deaths in the region, they rely on local numbers.
Different Hamas officials have made different claims about their losses, and all the sources seems vague. It’s been reported as 6000 - 8000 either lost (could be casualties including injured survivors not able to fight) or dead. And some of them deny the numbers entirely.
https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/in-gaza-authorities-lose-count-of-the-dead-779ff694
It’s absolutely not the 15K that IDF claims.
I don’t think so, this is from your January link (my emphasis):
The wounded are counted separately.
This article seems to have the clearest numbers
https://today.lorientlejour.com/article/1365166/israeli-forces-have-killed-20-30-percent-of-hamas-fighters-wsj-report.html
25-30K fighters, 20-30% killed, so at best ~10K down to ~5K, assuming their intel is correct. It’s very strange that the estimate of killed fighters is in percent and injuries is in absolute numbers. Doesn’t make me feel confident they got the context right of the numbers shared
I believe those are still from January, when the total number of deaths was 25,000. So if they are correct then that would result in a casualty ratio between 1.5:1 and 4:1
… And they’re almost all caused by one side, not casualties divided across two equal fighting armies among civilians.
I’m not sure that matters, since the majority of military casualties are caused by the same side.
So for example, when evaluating the Iraq War you would compare Iraqi civilian to Iraqi military casualties. There is little point in looking at American civilian casualties.