It's worth noting that even after finding out the "most moral" army is conducting mass surveillance, they're still happy to provide them services.
Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage.
Regardless, the death toll in gaza (somewhere between 45,000 and 600,000) suggests that this mass surveillance isn’t being used effectively to reduce the death toll. It also doesn’t take mass surveillance to know that bombing hospitals and schools is going to kill innocent people.
Also, Israel has attacked or destroyed most hospitals in Gaza. So the Health Ministry's counting is obviously hindered.
Only 34,344 of the GHM estimate are confirmed identities. The rest of either missing but presumed dead or gross adjustments. They are open about using "media reports to assess deaths in the north of Gaza".
The Lancet study published in January 2025 estimated 70,000 as of October, 2024. This is higher than the GHM estimate, but I can't find anything close to your 200k estimate.
So you may believe in your estimates, but they are many multiples larger than any other credible source that I can find... so it's odd to wave these figures around without any sources, links, etc.
Or maybe that man is a hamas spy, right?
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/press-briefing-francesca...
“65,000 is the number of Palestinians are certain killed, including over, of which 75% are women and children.
In fact, we shall start the thinking of 680,000, because this is the number that some scholars and scientists claim being the real death toll in Gaza.
And it would be hard to be able to prove or disprove this number, especially if investigators and others remained banned from entering the occupied Palestinian territory, and particularly the Gaza Strip.”
The death toll could be that high. I hope to hell it isn’t. But we don’t know and won’t know until the killing stops. We do know that tens of thousands of innocent people have been killed, and at least 150,000 people injured.
Keep in mind deaths published by the Gaza(Hamas) ministry of health do not differentiate civilian vs combatant deaths at all.
> The current official toll is 64,718 Palestinians killed in Gaza and 163,859 injured, since the start of the war on 7 October 2023
You may have been misled by the headline “X killed or injured”.. those are two different things, and we’re talking about the number killed.
I don’t know if those numbers are accurate (the article about the IDF solider claims it is), but I’m not even questioning that. The GP is claiming that an order of magnitude more people have been killed than even GMH claims.
And that 65k number does not include indirect deaths - i.e. deaths by starvation, or death from something that could have been easily survived if there were still hospitals instead of rubble. Which is where the 680,000 number comes from - the largest estimate of how many may have been killed directly and indirectly by this genocidal war.
> Halevi stepped down as chief of staff in March after leading the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) for the first 17 months of the war, which is now approaching its second anniversary.
> The retired general told a community meeting in southern Israel earlier this week that more than 10% of Gaza’s 2.2 million population had been killed or injured – “more than 200,000 people”.
The point is that we know 64,000 is almost certainly an undercount. Notably it hasn't changed much in the last year since the Hamas ministry of health collapsed.
The commenter above is correct in saying the bound of deaths is very likely between 45,000 and 600,000. We have good reason to suspect it was over 100,000 late last year. We won't know the actual number until an independent assessment can occur.
If you want to let the lack of a specific number hold you up while the killing continues, that’s up to you.
So while 680k (the current highest estimate) is probably higher than reality, god i hope it is, it’s also true that reality is probably much higher than the current GMH numbers.
From my understanding GHM numbers don't break these figures for those that are combatants either, the population overall is quite young and Hamas is known to use child soldiers as well. Journalists(along with doctors) in Gaza have even been themselves involved in holding hostages for Hamas[0]. There are many issues like this which significantly complicate separating combatant deaths from non-combatant deaths.
> And that 65k number does not include indirect deaths - i.e. deaths by starvation, or death from something that could have been easily survived if there were still hospitals instead of rubble.
The 65k is AFAIU not even advertised by the GHM as confirmed deaths(i.e. deaths with confirmed identities), it's an estimate from an organization(Hamas) which is highly incentivized to report the highest figures that are believable internationally. There are not any incentives for them to underestimate casualties since they use casualties figures for propaganda purposes and will use the highest figures they can come up with while maintaining some level of credibility.
It's also unlikely there are many deaths that can be attributed directly to starvation, while there may be food insecurity issues there is still sufficient aid reaching Gaza to largely prevent deaths from starvation. There are countries in the world where there is actual famine and pictures/videos from those places(i.e. those taken out in the open on the streets) look nothing like those from Gaza. Even organizations like the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs have been known to put out(and subsequently walk back) blatantly false information[1] to make it appear the situation is worse than it actually is.
> Which is where the 680,000 number comes from - the largest estimate of how many may have been killed directly and indirectly by this genocidal war.
Numbers 10x those put out by the GHM(which is already highly incentivized to inflate casualty figures) are not remotely credible.
IMO the figures put out by the GHM are likely within the correct order of magnitude, keeping in mind that those figures include combatant deaths. For a conflict like this which involves urban warfare(where similar conflicts historically have had very high casualties) such casualty figures certainly don't appear to be unusually high.
Claims of genocide made against Israel simply do not stand up to scrutiny. Civilian deaths are largely in line with what would expect for a war like this, especially one where enemy combatants are not in uniform and intentionally hide amongst the civilian population and fight from civilian areas(which is of course a war crime). There are strong incentives both internationally and domestically for Israel to minimize civilian casualties as much as feasible.
If intelligence from surveillance increases combatant deaths then it could be expected that the death figures like those from the GHM(which include combatant deaths) may rise even if the actual civilian casualty rate decreases.
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/19/middleeast/gaza-neighborhood-...
[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-one-un-leaders-mistak...
More explicitly: 64,718 killed + 163,859 injured =~ "more than 200,000 people"
I don't understand what basis you (and other commenters) have to suggest that these estimates are all wrong, you merely say "we have good reason". What reason?
But those who are well informed agree it the data supports a number above 45k, probably above 65k, and the highest estimate published is 680k. If we use a higher number we are just making shit up. If we use a lower number we are choosing to ignore a data point without a specific reason to write it off. “It defies reality” isn’t an actual reason - it’s just an assertion that it’s wrong. Neither is “wouldn’t the GMH cite higher numbers?” - how would you confirm that 1/3 of people in your city are still alive if people are scattered, communication is down, and an unknown number of people have fled?
but either way, the tens of thousands of innocents killed and the complete destruction of the infrastructure of gaza is appalling - and arguing about specific numbers is pretty pointless if we don’t agree on that.
It's also non-peer-reviewed, and based on rather arbitrarily picking a multiplier of 15x from a range of past conflicts' multipliers. One author described the figure as "purely illustrative" in a now-deleted tweet.
The UN is one of the organizations that is heavily responsible for perpetuating this conflict, from promoting terrorism via UNRWA schools[0] to employing terrorists[1] and those who sympathize with terrorists[2]. These[3] sort of biased UN reports in general tend to be deeply flawed and do not stand up to even basic scrutiny[4].
> thinks murdering children is ok because heyyy some of them are child soldiers. Sounds good.
Do you really think 17 year olds can't also be combatants? The Gaza(Hamas) Health Ministry last I checked counts children as anyone below the age of 18.
[0] https://www.newsweek.com/your-tax-dollars-are-being-used-tea...
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/world/middleeast/gaza-unr...
[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/terror-and-securit...
[3] https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/un-geneva-inquiry-israel-gaza-...
[4] https://unwatch.org/un-watch-rebuttal-legal-analysis-of-pill...
I would love to be "well-informed", but how can I get there with hearsay?
> Neither is “wouldn’t the GMH cite higher numbers?” - how would you confirm that 1/3 of people in your city are still alive if people are scattered, communication is down, and an unknown number of people have fled?
Once again, the 68k figure is not confirmed! This is already an estimate. The figure for confirmed identifies is much lower, around ~35k. So this is a totally false argument. I'm not saying the estimate is wrong, I'm just saying that if there was a reason for the estimate to be 1/3 of people in Gaza, that's what they would say.
Massive eyeroll. These stories you've linked to are overcooked propaganda, where any teacher who thinks palestinians are being treated poorly - because they are living in an apartheid state, essentially an open-air prison - is labelled as promoting hate or terrorism.
You could just as easily write a report about israeli schools teaching hate, and promoting terrorism if you sat in and heard how they teach a skewed version of the history of the conflict, or cherry pick teachers who's social media was angry in the wake of oct 7th. Harder story to sell to the ny times tho.
17 year olds can be combatants. Sure. So either all of the dead children are 17 year old combatants or you’re ok with some child murder. Exactly how much child murder are you ok with?
How much journalist murder are you ok with?
How much aid worker murder are you ok with?
How much collective punishment are you ok with?
All of these things are happening - there is no doubt - the only thing we’re debating is exactly how much has happened. Is there a number you wouldn’t be ok with? What specific percentage of the >65k dead would have to be innocent before you’d have a problem with it? 50%… 75%… 95%?
The issue is far more complex than Palestinians being treated poorly, they are also treated poorly by their own rulers. Extremist ideologies are pervasive within Palestine, just look up any Palestinian opinion polling. That a very large percentage of Palestinians are taught and hold extremist ideologies is well documented. Also a military occupation is not equivalent to an apartheid state, Apartheid is segregation/discrimination based on race, the sort of discrimination you see under military occupation in regards to Israel is discrimination based on citizenship, which is a form of discrimination virtually all countries practice to various degrees.
> You could just as easily write a report about israeli schools teaching hate, and promoting terrorism if you sat in and heard how they teach a skewed version of the history of the conflict, or cherry pick teachers who's social media was angry in the wake of oct 7th. Harder story to sell to the ny times tho.
Those UNRWA teachers weren't angry in the wake of oct 7th, they were celebrating the attacks.
What percentage of the population of Palestinian governed territories(i.e. West Bank Areas A/B and Gaza) is Jewish...0%
What percentage of the population of Israeli governed territories is Muslim...around 20%
Seems pretty clear to me which side has the bigger problem with teaching intolerant ideologies.
> 17 year olds can be combatants. Sure. So either all of the dead children are 17 year old combatants or you’re ok with some child murder. Exactly how much child murder are you ok with?
My point was simply that casualty numbers are complex and that one can't simply equate Children to non-combatants/civilians.
> All of these things are happening - there is no doubt - the only thing we’re debating is exactly how much has happened. Is there a number you wouldn’t be ok with? What specific percentage of the >65k dead would have to be innocent before you’d have a problem with it? 50%… 75%… 95%?
There should be 0 civilian casualties, but those civilian deaths that do happen are almost entirely due to Hamas fighting from within civilian areas(which is of course a war crime). Unfortunately causing civilian casualties is part of the Hamas strategy[0]. When one fails to recognize the side is intentionally inducing civilian casualties then finding a solution will be much harder.
From a simple incentives analysis if one allows the strategy of using human shields to be an effective military strategy...then that would further incentivize combatants like Hamas to use human shields even more. The rules of war are deliberately written in a way that allows parties to conduct warfare, otherwise nobody would follow those rules of war. This is one reason why collateral damage is not considered a war crime while deliberately using human shields is a war crime.
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/11/middleeast/sinwar-hamas-israe...
Virtually all of the discourse on Israel-Palestine concerns moral righteousness or moral shame. I think the era of moral arguments in geopolitics is coming to an end, because the unipolar or Communist-Capitalist bipolar world combined with the Holocaust that enabled geopolitical moral arguments is basically dead.
It might just be my interest in global affairs spiking to avoid the constant bad news from the Trump administration, but I think we are entering a much more turbulent (and historically normal) period of realist/self-interest directed foreign policy. The US isn't around to be "good cop" (I can't emphasize the quotes around "good" enough).
I think this is why we are surrounded by the sense that authoritarianism is on the rise. The US won't care if you are democratic or authoritarian. The US won't care if you invade your neighbor if it doesn't disrupt them too much. Or the US just plain doesn't care at all.
So it's my general opinion that even if the Palestinians are more morally righteous in the great moral book-pounding, history-pointing, casualty-counting endless debate ... the era where that mattered has come to an end. Alas, I think we are entering a might-makes-right era of world politics, especially in the Middle East, and especially since the US has its own oil now from the Dakota shale fracking.
- begins with the high estimate from [2], which uses some very questionable data (like WhatApp chats) to argue that most deaths were not counted by GHM
- extrapolates it to the present, as if the casualty rate were a constant
- multiplies it by 5, which was the multipler that was somewhat arbitrarily picked in that Lancet letter [3]
- forgets that this includes future deaths (attributable to past conflict events), and uses the past tense as if all these supposed indirect deaths already occurred
They also end up with an estimate of "about 380,000 under-five-year-old infant" deaths, which seems unlikely since there were never more than about ~340k children under five in the strip.
Overall, it's about as believable as that letter which claimed Hamas was under-reporting starvations by over three orders of magnitude [4].
[1] https://arena.org.au/politics-of-counting-gazas-dead/
[2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
[3] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...