Maybe it's because the overwhelming majority of the people being killed are actually just regular people?
At 2:1 civilians to combatants, this is an unusually low civilian death count.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-ma...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrain...
E.g. you might compare it to ukrainian battles that took place in cities, but you wouldn't compare it to ukrainian battles that took place in the middle of nowhere where no civilians were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio has some things to compare against. Part of the problem is it is often hard to identify who is a civilian, and often different battles will categorize them differently. For example, in the iraq war us was accused of significantly undercounting civilian casualties. All this makes it hard to do direct comparisons.
Numbers from:
The current geopolitical outcome of Egypt accepting large numbers of Palestinian is that Israel does what it is doing now to Palestine, to Egypt at some point in the future.
Jordan took a large number in the past and they were terrible guests -attempting to overthrow the sovereign government- and got expelled. Black September left a very bad taste in nearly everyone’s mouth. Governments friendly towards Palestine are very much against physically taking them after those events
Also, why would Egypt let in those that might provoke conflict and war with Israel?
It's a fools mission, and one which Egypt was quite clear on in November/December it didn't want to embark on.
That border is even more tightly controlled than the Israeli one AFAIK.
Also, some useful conext:
The Israeli border wasn't always like today. It has been progressively tightened step by step as nutjobs on the Arab side used whatever leeway they had to stage suicide attacks and smuggle in rocket parts.
From Google: ================= Egypt, however, has warned against an influx of refugees. It facilitates humanitarian aid into Gaza, but has said a mass exodus of Palestinians out of Gaza into Egypt is a red line, saying it fears Israel might never let the Palestinians go back. =====================
And Egypts real fear is that the Palestinians in Egypt will try to take back Palestine. Which wouldn't be very good for Egypt and engage them in a war with Israel.
The expectation is that there are at a minimum 15/20% dead under the bombed and decimated buildings. It could well be much, much higher, even double, or triple is not infeasible, given the large scale untargeted bombing, population dispersement and recognised IDF tactics that don't allow for groups to even consider searching and rescue operations in most cases but leave possible survivors buried under the rubble to die slowly and horribly.
The current numbers are just not even close to verifiable given the circumstances, but are statistically clearly far worse in terms of civilians on all measures.
Earlier it has been said that based on previous reporting from previous incidents we can roughly trust the total numbers Hamas release evem if they are obviously wrong in that they claim every death to be an innocent civilian.
All reporting I've seen has made it clear that any movement of population in Gaza has been subject to IDF and more broadly Israeli control.
Every reported case I have seen appears to have been demanded by Israel, and the Palestinians have had no choice in it.
I'm not sure we're you think Hamas are involved in this at all?
It's all been forced displacements by Israel. And none of it has been willing. Where people have stayed and not moved often they have died, even with not the slightest involvement with Hamas.
Addressing your second paragraph: Not quite sure if your point, but the numbers of deaths/casualties are broadly (my interpretation) seen as being as accurate as are available, and likely to be a significant undercount of the real number.
I have to say the continual questioning of, what by a number of significant indicators, looks to be an undercount of the total number of people deliberately killed by Israel, in such a short period is appalling.
It's highly likely that when we say 30,000 it's a wrong figure because it's 40,000 Israel deliberately killed.
If it's wrong and it's only 20,000 Israel killed it doesn't matter. They should still stop the killing.
And if they could, why would they help Israel displace the palestinian population from palestinian territory?
The only resistance groups in the Gaza strip that might have militia units for women that I know about are PFLP and DFLP, and I forgot which one I've seen a video of militia women from. They are probably very small and not deployed at the moment. This means that kids and women aren't in the 'brigades', and that a majority of killed palestinians are "civilian" for sure.
Israel claims that every male they kill is a combatant, and israeli pundits and politicians routinely equate terrorist and palestinian and say things like 'there are no innocent civilians in the Gaza strip'. Neither is true, many they kill are elderly or obviously unaffiliated with the 'brigades'.
Of course, this is irrelevant, since Israel is starving the entire population of the Gaza strip and kills or maims pretty much anyone they see in the areas where they operate, sometimes even other IDF soldiers or hostages.
“The latest death toll from the attack is now 767 civilians, 20 hostages and 376 members of the security forces, giving a total of 1,163. One person remains missing.” https://www.barrons.com/news/new-tally-puts-october-7-attack...
If you watch footage from Nova you'll see large patches of obvious damage from Hellfire missiles, and footage from kibbutzes commonly show damage way beyond what you'd expect from handgrenades or RPG:s.
The “biased” video I posted is simply a recording of an interview of a survivor of the kibbutz on an Israeli talk show. Do you have any substantive critique of the video, besides just lazily dismissing it as biased?
It took more than three days of heavy fighting for the Israeli army to regain control, and left the country deeply traumatised by violence unseen since the country's formation in 1948.
Police are still working to assess the scale of the sexual violence that was reported alongside the killings."
I'm pretty sure "security forces" includes police and possibly firefighters and even ambulance drivers. What I found in the IDF site is 282 soldiers: https://www.gov.il/en/departments/news/swords-of-iron-idf-ca...
So the ratio is more like over 3:1. More importantly your statement not true ("civilian to soldier").
When the US fights a war we get drones bombing weddings, private mercenaries gunning down civilians in the streets of Baghdad etc. Armies engage in a very brutal practice called war which is different than the more brutal practice we tend to call terrorism. During most wars any western army fights (or really any army) there are usually many incidents one might call war crimes. Now in a post-truth world where words have no meaning you can call anyone anything you want.
When the US went to war after 9/11 what do you think its casualty rate was overall (even ignoring the fact that it didn't fight under similar conditions)? How many children did the US kill (by the way the US considered every male >14yo to be a combatant AFAIK)?
46,319 civilian casualties. I think a guess of 50% under 18yo is probably not off the mark. Some claims this number is under-reported. 52,893 "taliban insurgents killed". I'll bet a fair amount of those also under 18yo. 2,400 ISIL-K.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80...
There are a lot of differences between these wars. Gaza is much denser. The US was under no time pressure and wasn't getting e.g. continuous rocket barrages falling on it.
The IDF in general does not intentionally target civilians. It targets military targets. It might be very loose or too loose in this targeting and in this conflict but it still does as a rule. The Hamas on the other hand does intentionally target civilians and engages in other activities like mutilation and rape. It also uses civilians as shields and intentionally embeds in civilian environments for cover. There's also the little matter of who started the war.
So if you want to designate all military as terrorists then we'll have to find a different word for terrorists.
35000 dead, almost 2 million homeless and starving, ~10000 more buried under rubble and ~10000 taken prisoner is somehow less brutal in your eyes than ~1500 dead and several villages deserted, 10000s of thousands homeless, and 200 taken prisoner?
You and I have different definitions of brutality, so afraid I’m this discussion is at its end.