4 ms·

> Taking the highest figure Some groups do put the figures above 1 million.[0] > I think the estimates for Gaza, with a population of about 2.2 million, are b

> Taking the highest figure Some groups do put the figures above 1 million.[0] > I think the estimates for Gaza, with a population of about 2.2 million, are between 70 to 75,000. Keep in mind these figures are not civilian casualty figures, they are overall casualty figures. Data quality issues do make comparisons rather tricky. Generally you would also want to compare against similar battles that have mainly urban conflict rather than a war in a large country where the amount of fighting varied much more. In any case looking at raw casualty numbers doesn't really give one the best picture by itself, analyzing combatant to civilian death ratios is probably better than population death ratios as that gives you a better idea at how careful parties are at reducing civilian casualties. Unfortunately Hamas also uses tactics that are designed to increase civilian casualties as well which further complicates comparative analysis. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualt...

watutalkinbout 1mo ago
80% of ORB's estimated deaths came from four central governorates (completely excluding 3 altogether), and the mortality responses in those areas had major internal inconsistencies. The conclusion of peer-reviewed critique is that the ORB mortality data were not credible. That said, if someone is going to make a contentious claim, referencing the evidence or using some data to work up a basic attempt to substantiate the claim is the only to look like you aren't just making up claims. If data just on deaths is varying by a whole factor of 10, I can't see how you could possibly get anywhere near any meaningful figure for 'combatant to civilian death ratios' in Iraq. You're adding another layer ontop of data that you already recognise is hugely flawed. Add to that the issue that, in Gaza, Israel has completely sealed off the area from international observers, so credible data on "combatant to civilian death ratios" just won't exist. All I can say is that based on the data, the claim made is absolutely not supported by the evidence. [Edit - even if the million figure were credible, it's still at least double, and actually indicating the opposite of what was claimed]
- jameshilliard 1mo ago
  > 80% of ORB's estimated deaths came from four central governorates (completely excluding 3 altogether), and the mortality responses in those areas had major internal inconsistencies. The conclusion of peer-reviewed critique is that the ORB mortality data were not credible. Yeah, I'm not sure how credible it is, I only pointed that one out since you were comparing generally upper range estimates with other upper range estimates. > I can't see how you could possibly get anywhere near any meaningful figure for 'combatant to civilian death ratios' in Iraq. I mean, it's the figure that I think matters the most. I agree it's probably also one of the most difficult figures to accurately determine. > Add to that the issue that, in Gaza, Israel has completely sealed off the area from international observers, so credible data on "combatant to civilian death ratios" just won't exist. International observers can't operate in Gaza without what is effectively the consent of Hamas. Hamas deliberately doesn't properly differentiate civilian deaths from combatant deaths so it seems not particularly likely that international observers could get accurate data on combatant to civilian death ratios if they are being watched by Hamas. > All I can say is that based on the data, the claim made is absolutely not supported by the evidence. [Edit - even if the million figure were credible, it's still at least double, and actually indicating the opposite of what was claimed] Overall deaths is not really the figure I would focus on regardless.
  - watutalkinbout 1mo ago
    I'm just going to remind you here that you're arguing with me about my figures that I threw together to question a claim someone else made out of thin air, which it largely did, and your main point of contention is that I should be using data that nobody can get hold of. In terms of my statement about intenational observers / journalists- I don't think it's contentious to suggest that the overwhelming reason they can't operate in Gaza is because Israel won't allow them into Gaza. If Israel let them in and they were impeded or detained or killed by Hamas, then those would be possible outcomes. The UN Human Rights Office described the restriction as lasting more than 18 months by June 2025, with only a few IDF-controlled visits. The list of countries that grant chaperoned journalistic access to places includes: North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Eritrea for starters. This isn't exactly a hall of fame...

watutalkinbout 1mo ago

80% of ORB's estimated deaths came from four central governorates (completely excluding 3 altogether), and the mortality responses in those areas had major internal inconsistencies. The conclusion of peer-reviewed critique is that the ORB mortality data were not credible. That said, if someone is going to make a contentious claim, referencing the evidence or using some data to work up a basic attempt to substantiate the claim is the only to look like you aren't just making up claims. If data just on deaths is varying by a whole factor of 10, I can't see how you could possibly get anywhere near any meaningful figure for 'combatant to civilian death ratios' in Iraq. You're adding another layer ontop of data that you already recognise is hugely flawed. Add to that the issue that, in Gaza, Israel has completely sealed off the area from international observers, so credible data on "combatant to civilian death ratios" just won't exist. All I can say is that based on the data, the claim made is absolutely not supported by the evidence. [Edit - even if the million figure were credible, it's still at least double, and actually indicating the opposite of what was claimed]

jameshilliard 1mo ago
> 80% of ORB's estimated deaths came from four central governorates (completely excluding 3 altogether), and the mortality responses in those areas had major internal inconsistencies. The conclusion of peer-reviewed critique is that the ORB mortality data were not credible. Yeah, I'm not sure how credible it is, I only pointed that one out since you were comparing generally upper range estimates with other upper range estimates. > I can't see how you could possibly get anywhere near any meaningful figure for 'combatant to civilian death ratios' in Iraq. I mean, it's the figure that I think matters the most. I agree it's probably also one of the most difficult figures to accurately determine. > Add to that the issue that, in Gaza, Israel has completely sealed off the area from international observers, so credible data on "combatant to civilian death ratios" just won't exist. International observers can't operate in Gaza without what is effectively the consent of Hamas. Hamas deliberately doesn't properly differentiate civilian deaths from combatant deaths so it seems not particularly likely that international observers could get accurate data on combatant to civilian death ratios if they are being watched by Hamas. > All I can say is that based on the data, the claim made is absolutely not supported by the evidence. [Edit - even if the million figure were credible, it's still at least double, and actually indicating the opposite of what was claimed] Overall deaths is not really the figure I would focus on regardless.
- watutalkinbout 1mo ago
  I'm just going to remind you here that you're arguing with me about my figures that I threw together to question a claim someone else made out of thin air, which it largely did, and your main point of contention is that I should be using data that nobody can get hold of. In terms of my statement about intenational observers / journalists- I don't think it's contentious to suggest that the overwhelming reason they can't operate in Gaza is because Israel won't allow them into Gaza. If Israel let them in and they were impeded or detained or killed by Hamas, then those would be possible outcomes. The UN Human Rights Office described the restriction as lasting more than 18 months by June 2025, with only a few IDF-controlled visits. The list of countries that grant chaperoned journalistic access to places includes: North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Eritrea for starters. This isn't exactly a hall of fame...