Skip to content

Raw data: The death toll in Gaza

As long as we're talking about Gaza, here's an updated set of fatality figures:

The cumulative death toll as of today is just over 29,000, about 1.3% of the total population of Gaza. Dead and injured come to just under 100,000, or 4.3% of the total population. On a population basis, that's six times the number of American casualties in all of World War II.¹

¹During World War II the US suffered roughly 1 million dead and wounded out of a population of 136 million, for a casualty rate of 0.7 percent.

26 thoughts on “Raw data: The death toll in Gaza

  1. raoul

    I think what this shows was the vindictiveness of Israel the first two months. Dropping 500 ordinance to kill one or two targets on a block was a war crime pure and simple. We have seen already three videos of Israeli soldiers killing individuals while waving white flags including a couple hostages which also a war crime. Obviously the IDF comportment is currently better, but like Hamas killing over a thousand innocent people being a criminal act, let’s not forget that Israel killing thousands upon thousand was also criminal. Yes, civilians do die in conflict, but this chart shows the slaughter of Palestinians from October to December was intentional and did not need to happen. The history of Israel is marked with hundred of instances where Jewish people kill Palestinians as a matter of revenge including hundreds in the West Bank these past few months who had nothing to do with the attack. If you do not believe it, just listen to their interviews, it is like a MAGA infestation of violence.

  2. tango

    We should not forget that:

    1) These are Hamas figures. While there may not be any better ones available, they are almost certainly significantly exaggerated, and

    2) They also include the numbers of Hamas fighters killed.

    1. cmayo

      We should not forget that when a woman claims to have been raped or sexually assaulted:

      1) She was probably asking for it. What was she wearing, anyway?

      2) She actually enjoyed it.

      /s

    2. Coby Beck

      "they are almost certainly significantly exaggerated"

      This is a completely false statement, and I challenge you to provide any evidence to suggest there has been an even slight exageration. Others have made independent estimations, including the US military, and their numbers are higher, not lower. The Hamas Ministry of health (not the militant wing) is only reporting confirmed deaths with names and ID numbers. By all accounts there are thousands of additional dead. There are "missing, assumed dead". There are 1000's who were buried in the rubble and either were killed immediately or died awaiting rescue that would never come. Think about that. There has already been at least one discovery of a mass grave of people summarily executed.

      Isreal will not be able to whitewash this, though I don't hold my breath for any kind of accountability.

        1. Coby Beck

          from your source: "The number of persons killed in the explosion has not been independently verified."

          So. maybe you are jumping the gun on that one? Regardless, that is a single incident and you are a long way from justifying your "almost certainly significantly exaggerated" characterization of the total figures.

          Are you also amused by the thousands left under the rubble?

          "Of course, there were zero casualties before Hamas broke the cease fire"

          This delusion is a necessary part of Isreal's perpetual false narrative of innocent victimhood. Hamas' heinous attack did not occur in a vacuum.

    3. MF

      Also, comparing Gaza dear with US WWII dead is fundamentally dishonest because the WWII was not fought on US territory (except for Pearl Harbour) and we won. An honest person who was not trying to slander the only Jewish state (but don't call him an anti-Semite!) would have compared with German or Japanese dead.

  3. kenalovell

    On the other hand, a grand total of twelve (12) IDF members have been killed in Gaza this entire month. Talk of a "ceasefire" basically means "Israel stopping its slaughter of Palestinians who have lost any effective means of resistance".

  4. ruralhobo

    Those figures are for violent deaths only, and even then ones that were confirmed with names, ID numbers and the like, excluding people buried under rubble or buried by their families without notification. The main weapons of war are now hunger and disease, with the health system almost entirely destroyed. Things are not getting incrementally better but exponentially worse.

  5. JimFive

    I don't think US WWII casualties is a good comparison, German, English, or French casualties might be more appropriate. No one was bombing New York in WWII.

    1. Salamander

      Exactly. How many non-combatant, non-military-affiliated American civilians were killed in WWII would be a more accurate comparison. Israel is liquidating Gaza: killing as many civilians as it can, destroying all the infrastructure, dwelling places, farms, production sites. Making it a desolation. Heck, they've even bragged that they could nuke it and get the job done in one.

  6. Steve C

    OK, let's compare the numbers that are actually comparable.

    There are two groups.
    -The group that made the initial major, violent military attack: Germany, Japan, Gaza.
    -The group that defended themselves and brought the vast majority of the fighting to the attacking group: US, Israel

    I leave out most of Europe and Asia because they were attacked, but also had fighting in their territory, which skews the numbers to be different from Israel and Gaza. I do not take into account whether you consider occupation to be a justification for the Hamas attacks. Similarly I do not take into account whether embargoes were justification for the Pearl Harbor attack. Justification is irrelevant to the numbers.

    Attackers non-combatant, non-military-affiliated civilians killed(% total population):
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties, "Civilian deaths due to military activity and crimes against humanity)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Israel–Hamas_war

    Germany 2.2-4.3%
    Japan 0.8-1.1%
    Gaza 0.8% using 70% civilian rate, above the minimums quoted in the Wiki.

    Defenders non-combatant, non-military-affiliated civilians killed:

    US 0.009%
    Israel 0.007%

    A fair comparison says the Gaza death rate is 0.2 to 0.9 of the death rate of comparable countries in WWII.
    The Israeli death rate is 0.8 of the comparable country in WWII.

    All deaths are tragedies.
    Israel suffered death rates comparable to the US in WWII.
    Gaza is suffering death rates slightly below Japan, and much less than Germany.

    1. ruralhobo

      Neither Japan nor Germany ever suffered even close to the death rate in Gaza over three months, except maybe after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By the time this is over Gazan death rates will almost certainly be MUCH higher than those of Japan or Germany over the entire war.

      Also, the death rate we know for Gaza is only from violent death, thus excluding from hunger and disease due to Israel's blockade, and even then only when the names and ID numbers were duly noted.

      1. Steve C

        I compared the best estimate of the deaths in a conflict. If you disagree with the numbers, say so.

        If you want to compare numbers over only the first three months of a conflict, go right ahead. In general, excluding specific data after you have seen all the data is not a good way to get unbiased results.

        If you want to compare predictions made after the first three months of a conflict, go right ahead. Predictions are unreliable and vary wildly. Consider Hamas could at any time launch an Iranian-supplied missile to hit Tel Aviv, killing 30,000 Israelis.

        If you want to prepare a comparison of deaths from hunger, disease, etc. over some period, go right ahead. That might be useful. Just make sure you pick the period before you look at the data.

        1. Coby Beck

          "In general, excluding specific data after you have seen all the data is not a good way to get unbiased results."

          This is a very fair point. But it is also a fair point that even if your numbers are all correct, their meaning can still make any conclusions you want to draw unfounded.

          In this case, you have compared total numbers over multiple years compiled after the dust has settled against a single category of deaths (violent and officially tallied) reported within the very early stages of a conflict.

          Given that this comparison is already close, I don't think it is possible to be fair minded and not expect that civilian deaths in Gaza will far exceed proportionally those of countries in WWII.

          1. MF

            Given that Germany age Japan were mostly rural and did not have fighting or bombing raids and Gaza is mostly urban, that is to be expected.

            Maybe compare Gaza with Japanese And German cities?

          2. Steve C

            So you are justified in predicting further deaths in Gaza, but predicting further deaths in Israel is not to be considered. Got it.

            As long as your assumptions are clear, so we can judge your biases accordingly.

            1. Coby Beck

              This is a bit of a bizarre response, not sure what you want to hear. We are all free to make predictions about future Isreali deaths.

              1. Steve C

                Sorry, I was conflating your response with a previous one.
                You did not exclude the possibility of future Israeli deaths. You merely focused exclusively on future Gaza deaths.

          3. Steve C

            And I drew no conclusions, despite your claim, just reported numerical results.

            As you say, the rates are currently comparable, Gaza to Japan (ignoring Gaza to Germany)
            As you must notice, the trend line will zero out in about 2-3 months, at about 50 deaths per day average, so 4500 more deaths. Which does not “far exceed” Japan never mind Germany.

            I am not claiming that the trend line is accurate. I am only pointing out that since *you* are the one predicting the future, the least you can do is use the available data rather than pulling things out of thin air.

    2. BobPM2

      Germany and Japan had two of the largest military industrial complexes in the world. They had massive shipyards, airplane manufacturers, and weapons production facilities, along with self sustaining food production. Gaza is more like a South African Bantustan that wasn't even allowed to control its own border or formally build an actual military, and didn't have enough land to feed itself, and was prevented by Israel from exploiting its own coast.

      I concede that comparison to US casualties is weak, other than in how people might react to the scale of death. But it is in no way comparable to the Axis powers. Maybe the terrorists that killed Archduke Ferdinand in WWI.

Comments are closed.