| Ok, at least you are engaging. A few rebutals:
> Yes the author is pro-Israel. I would assume the author the Reuters article is anti-Israel. This doesn't automatically disqualify either account. > The issue is with the MoH is the breakdown of the numbers, not the overall number. No contradiction. > He provides an alternative to Lancet. His numbers do not follow Lancet, so mixing his calculations with Lancet's is disingenuous. > Hamas said they had 40k trained fighters which was about 2% of the population. They also recruited heavily throughout the war. Israel has a standing army of 170,000. The area is an active war zone. These numbers are feasible. > The 8900 is fighters identified by Israel by name. This is an extremely high standard you are applying to identify fighters overall. For example in Ukraine, this standard would identify most of the 200,00 Russians they have claimed to kill to be civilians. > Your logic is inconsistent. According to you over a 2 year period Israel couldn't kill tens of thousands of fighters in a large active military all over Gaza but could kill tens of thousands of exposed and trapped civilians in the crossfire but Hamas couldn't have harmed a few thousand of those same civilians. > No genocide. > This is not disputing numbers. It's disputing the nature of the conflict. |