757:
considered. This utterly distorts the result. When armies clash in pitched battles, almost all the casualities are of combatants. This explains for example why initial civilian casualty figures in the
Coalition allies' 2003 war in Iraq were very low, and similarly for the beginning of the American Coalition campaign in Afghanistan in 2001. This radically changed after the Iraqi and Afghani Talaban armies were practically wiped out, and the remaining Iraqi and Afghani militants threw off their uniforms, melted into the local village and urban populations, and fought using civilian shields. Using the total casualty figures while ignoring these changes not only disguises the brutality of the clash of armies, it gives a falsified general moral picture of those armies as having much better overall civilian:combatant ratios (sometimes "merely" 1:1) than they actually had when they engaged in some very bloody extensive "mop-up" local village/urban warfare, as in Mosul and Falluja. There the ratios could at best be 1:4 or even as bad as 19:1 (in contrast to the IDF's actual usual 1:1 ratio in its counter-terror Gaza conflicts), but this is not mentioned. Similarly, the simplified historical overview given in the article of most wars down through previous centuries chiefly relate to clashes of whole armies, and do not provide a base-line for other sorts of conflict. Most of them just were of armies as such, on each side, in which massed combatants fought each other, usually wearing military uniforms or at least carrying military gear clearly distinguishing them from civilians. These armies generally did not embed themselves in civilian areas and use them as shields, except when whole cities were being besieged. Civilian losses were naturally often relatively low in such wars. These simply cannot be compared as such with specifically counter-terrorism/counter-insurgency fighting. There we have to do with fighting people in civilian clothes hiding in urban or local settlement civilian populations and using them as shields, and in which rooting them out necessarily involves high risk of, and even high likelihood of, significant civilian casualties.
761:
preferential credulous use of figures from very leftist anti-Israel activist NGOs like B'Tselem that do not even pretend to be non-partisan, and such dubious authorities as the
International Red Cross itself that does pretend, very falsely, to non-partisanship. Most readers probably would be surprised to learn that the International Red Cross had a truly ignominious record during the Second World War in regard to Jews, doing very little to ensure better treatment or survival to those in Nazi-held lands, to prevent starvation and slaughters in local towns and cities, or in concentration- and outright death-camps, and not publicly criticising but rather even intentionally colluding with the Nazis and hiding the massive evidence it had of the death camps' very existence and the overall genocide. It is a matter of the public record, moreover, that the IRC subsequently refused for decades even to accept the Magen David Adom (Red Shield of David) as the local Israeli affiliate of the Red Cross, insisting that it not carry the Jewish symbol at all; that was somehow illegitimate, so only the Christian Red Cross or preferably the Muslim Red Crescent could be allowed even in Israel itself (naturally, the Magen David Adom ignored this demand, kept its Jewish symbol, also rejected the meaningless symbol suggested by the IRC as a final concession, and has only been allowed to affiliate in recent years). In the conflict in Gaza going on now, its top leaders have bluntly refused to facilitate delivery of medications or even to visit or promote decent treatment of Israeli hostages held by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It will not cooperate with the Magen David Adom, either, in such tasks. On this, see the article by Robert Williams, "The Red Cross Still Hates Jews," GateStone Institute.org for Feb. 11, 2024. So reliance on any of its figures relating to casualties in this conflict might well be mistaken. Extremely partisan groups, who have sometimes proven themselves supporters of or collaboraters with, genocide, should not be the basis of the article here.
765:
civilian:combatant ratios attained by the IDF in its various Gaza conflicts. (It is noteworthy even from a methodological point of view that there is no stylistic uniformity in references to civilian:combatant ratios in the article. There is a marked tendency just to present the numbers killed rather than the actual ratios. These, if presented in an uniform way, can be more easily compared, and perhaps not coincidentally, prove the unparalleled moral restraint Israel demands of its army.) Both Kemp and
Spencer assert flatly that Israel's civilian to combatant ratios in terrorist/insurgent warfare are the lowest in world history. General Dempsey affirmed that the IDF has taken truly exceptional care to avoid civilian casualties and sets a standard in fighting terrorist and insurgence groups well superior to that of the Americans themselves, and from which they can learn. Israel's methods and accomplishments are already a key topic of study in military academies in the Western democracies, as setting a standard to be followed.
784:
considered as combatants. They are not to be included in the civilian category when reckoning casualties. They then become responsible for their own fate as combatants, and the onus of their deaths lies with the combatant terrorists or insurgents, not those fighting them. This is so no matter who those civilians are. So of course civilian police who act on behalf of terrorists or counter-insurgents are no longer in the category of civilians, in international law. There should be some section of this article which presents the basic international laws regarding "civilian casualties."
529:
350:
382:
100:
117:
235:
49:
307:
296:
285:
274:
21:
601:
175:
148:
769:"The Morality of IDF Maneuvers in Gaza," JNS.org for Jan. 5, 2024, and his testimony back in 2010 before the U.N. Human Rights Council as given verbatim at "British Commander: The IDF Tried to Safeguard Civilians," Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2010. He refers to the 1:1 civilian:combatant ratio in several of his articles).
263:
760:
The article gives an entirely disproportionate space to Israel's conflicts with terrorists. Is there an agenda here of trying to make Israel's self-defense seem too costly in civilian casualties, delegitimising that? Is that a chief purpose in composing this article? One also notes in this regard the
783:
One last remark in regard to misleading methodology in the article: there seems a deliberate omission of reference to the basic rule in the international laws relating to warfare, that if civilians offer their support to being civilian shields, actively aid or collude with combatants, they are to be
768:
Col. Kemp led
British forces in Ireland at the time of the I.R.A. terrorism, and also British forces in counter-terrorist situations elsewhere as well, in both NATO and U.N. conflicts, and notably in Coalition forces in Afghanistan (on his evaluation of the IDF morality and casualty figures, see his
700:
It seems clear to me that the information presented in the Israel-Palestine conflict section is all relevant. The conflict has had many distinct phases, and the casualty numbers are quite contentious. It would be unreasonable for the article to merge these phases into one or to only cover one of the
776:
John
Spencer occupies the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, and has served in many military theatres over the decades. His evaluation makes some essential corrections to the sort of approach made in this Knowledge (XXG) article: "Memo to the 'Experts': Stop
772:
General Martin
Dempsey was the Joint Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army during the Obama years, and sent a team of senior officers to monitor in place the IDF's methods and performance during the 2014 "Protective Edge" conflict. Their report led to General Dempsey's summary comments reported above.
756:
The article as written is seriously misleading, both in overall analytic methodology and in specifics. It needs a total rewrite. For example, in terms of methodology, no distinctions are made in it about different kinds of warfare. It is as if such distinctions do not exist and need not even be
764:
I also note an absence from the article of any reference to the testimony by world-recognised top experts in counter-terrorist/counter-insurgency warfare, such as Col. (ret.) Richard Kemp, General Martin
Dempsey, John Spencer, and others (more on them below), concerning the exceptionally low
719:
I was wondering the same thing. It's striking that the Israel-Palestine conflict takes up almost as much space are THE ENTIRE rest of the article with all wars combined. This very misleading and represents a distorted view of reality. This section should be dramatically shortened.
663:
Yeah, it feels like only wars where one of the participants is a first-world country were included. One odd example is the inclusion of the
Israeli invasion of Lebanon but the exclusion (and even complete failure to mention) the Lebanon civil war (and Syria's takeover of Lebanon).
357:
158:
684:
Are we asserting that this conflict is more important the 2 world wars? Why such a long section? I think this should be reduced to one paragraph. Also, if we are focusing on wars that are not active then this section of the article should be removed all together.
465:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not
704:
However, the same could also be said of WW2. The
Japanese invasion of China is probably distinct enough from the German invasion of France in order to justify the article covering them separately. In my opinion, the WW2 section ought be expanded.
822:
541:
817:
721:
648:
How were the wars in this list chosen? I was just wondering How were the wars in this list chosen? Why is there no mentioned of the Syrian civil war for instance? Why the Russia – Ukraine war?
31:
474:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
248:
225:
187:
234:
780:
There are actually many other top authorities whose analyses I could cite. However, the point is made: this article needs a total rewrite, and better sources.
807:
92:
812:
215:
182:
153:
79:
553:
548:
735:
686:
665:
649:
191:
785:
725:
435:
406:
392:
128:
494:
431:
777:
Comparing Israel's War in Gaza to
Anything. It Has No Precedent," an Op-Ed in Newsweek Magazine for February 12, 2024.
27:
506:
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
458:
410:
396:
669:
565:
486:
423:
739:
690:
653:
134:
116:
477:
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
789:
186:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
84:
626:
490:
434:
may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the
427:
64:
734:
Either the Israel section should be shortened or many conflicts should be added from around the globe.
20:
634:
752:
Counter-terrorist/counter-insurgent warfare is essentially different, but not treated as such here
571:
399:, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
482:
48:
710:
633:
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
88:
in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10 civilian deaths for every soldier death?
613:
586:
567:
528:
485:
procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the
69:
500:
416:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
801:
497:. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
793:
743:
729:
714:
706:
694:
673:
657:
569:
381:
349:
680:
Why is the Israeli–Palestinian conflict section so much larger than the rest?
462:
related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
59:
621:
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
174:
147:
395:
procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the
625:] The anchor (#Children and women as human shields) has been
595:
572:
522:
376:
110:
43:
15:
455:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace
823:
Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
348:
233:
98:
499:
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the
452:
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
422:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the
818:
C-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
409:
to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
246:
This article has been checked against the following
358:
Military science, technology, and theory task force
331:
245:
93:Knowledge (XXG):Recent additions/2010/December
580:This page has archives. Sections older than
8:
200:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Military history
114:
440:
328:
242:
142:
72:). The text of the entry was as follows:
470:With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
180:This article is within the scope of the
80:International Committee of the Red Cross
144:
99:
722:2A0D:6FC0:72E:5700:4DD3:6D03:CBE6:B31C
644:How were the wars in this list chosen?
590:when more than 3 sections are present.
190:. To use this banner, please see the
808:Knowledge (XXG) Did you know articles
203:Template:WikiProject Military history
91:A record of the entry may be seen at
78:... that according to a study by the
7:
388:Warning: active arbitration remedies
413:, provided they are not disruptive)
133:It is of interest to the following
30:on 24 November 2010. The result of
14:
813:C-Class military history articles
584:may be automatically archived by
599:
527:
380:
305:
294:
283:
272:
261:
173:
146:
115:
47:
19:
220:This article has been rated as
26:This article was nominated for
58:appeared on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1:
794:06:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
695:14:00, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
674:08:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
658:13:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
436:contentious topics procedures
183:Military history WikiProject
68:column on 14 December 2010 (
839:
744:21:15, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
730:21:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
715:20:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
487:purpose of Knowledge (XXG)
424:purpose of Knowledge (XXG)
405:You must be logged-in and
266:Referencing and citation:
438:before editing this page.
356:
327:
219:
206:military history articles
168:
141:
701:sources for the numbers.
495:normal editorial process
432:normal editorial process
501:Arbitration enforcement
332:Associated task forces:
277:Coverage and accuracy:
85:civilian casualty ratio
56:Civilian casualty ratio
627:deleted by other users
491:standards of behaviour
428:standards of behaviour
353:
310:Supporting materials:
238:
123:This article is rated
104:
397:Arab–Israeli conflict
352:
237:
127:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
102:
481:After being warned,
411:making edit requests
445:Further information
299:Grammar and style:
252:for B-class status:
483:contentious topics
461:
459:make edit requests
407:extended-confirmed
393:contentious topics
389:
354:
239:
188:list of open tasks
129:content assessment
105:
641:
640:
616:in most browsers.
594:
593:
559:
558:
515:
514:
511:
510:
456:
387:
375:
374:
371:
370:
367:
366:
363:
362:
323:
322:
268:criterion not met
224:on the project's
192:full instructions
109:
108:
42:
41:
830:
635:Reporting errors
603:
602:
596:
589:
573:
545:
544:
531:
523:
441:
384:
377:
339:
329:
313:
309:
308:
302:
298:
297:
291:
287:
286:
280:
276:
275:
269:
265:
264:
243:
208:
207:
204:
201:
198:
197:Military history
177:
170:
169:
164:
161:
154:Military history
150:
143:
126:
120:
119:
111:
101:
51:
44:
23:
16:
838:
837:
833:
832:
831:
829:
828:
827:
798:
797:
754:
736:109.253.184.208
687:212.117.136.137
682:
666:147.235.204.194
650:212.117.136.137
646:
637:
619:
618:
617:
600:
585:
574:
568:
536:
507:
489:, any expected
446:
426:, any expected
419:
337:
311:
306:
300:
295:
289:
284:
278:
273:
267:
262:
205:
202:
199:
196:
195:
162:
156:
124:
103:Knowledge (XXG)
12:
11:
5:
836:
834:
826:
825:
820:
815:
810:
800:
799:
753:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
717:
702:
681:
678:
677:
676:
645:
642:
639:
638:
632:
631:
630:
614:case-sensitive
608:
607:
606:
604:
592:
591:
579:
576:
575:
570:
566:
564:
561:
560:
557:
556:
551:
538:
537:
532:
526:
520:
517:
513:
512:
509:
508:
504:
498:
479:
478:
475:
468:
467:
463:
451:
448:
447:
444:
418:
417:
414:
402:
385:
373:
372:
369:
368:
365:
364:
361:
360:
355:
345:
344:
342:
340:
334:
333:
325:
324:
321:
320:
318:
316:
315:
314:
303:
292:
281:
270:
256:
255:
253:
240:
230:
229:
218:
212:
211:
209:
178:
166:
165:
151:
139:
138:
132:
121:
107:
106:
96:
90:
89:
52:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
835:
824:
821:
819:
816:
814:
811:
809:
806:
805:
803:
796:
795:
791:
787:
781:
778:
774:
770:
766:
762:
758:
751:
745:
741:
737:
733:
732:
731:
727:
723:
718:
716:
712:
708:
703:
699:
698:
697:
696:
692:
688:
679:
675:
671:
667:
662:
661:
660:
659:
655:
651:
643:
636:
628:
624:
623:
622:
615:
611:
605:
598:
597:
588:
583:
578:
577:
563:
562:
555:
552:
550:
547:
546:
543:
540:
539:
535:
530:
525:
524:
521:
518:
505:
502:
496:
492:
488:
484:
476:
473:
472:
471:
464:
460:
454:
453:
450:
449:
443:
442:
439:
437:
433:
429:
425:
420:
415:
412:
408:
404:
403:
400:
398:
394:
386:
383:
379:
378:
359:
351:
347:
346:
343:
341:
336:
335:
330:
326:
319:
317:
312:criterion met
304:
301:criterion met
293:
290:criterion met
282:
279:criterion met
271:
260:
259:
258:
257:
254:
251:
250:
244:
241:
236:
232:
231:
227:
226:quality scale
223:
217:
214:
213:
210:
193:
189:
185:
184:
179:
176:
172:
171:
167:
160:
155:
152:
149:
145:
140:
136:
130:
122:
118:
113:
112:
97:
94:
87:
86:
81:
77:
74:
73:
71:
67:
66:
61:
57:
53:
50:
46:
45:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
786:106.71.99.35
782:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
755:
683:
647:
620:
612:Anchors are
609:
581:
533:
519:
516:
503:noticeboard.
480:
469:
421:
401:
390:
247:
221:
181:
135:WikiProjects
83:
76:Did you know
75:
65:Did you know
63:
55:
54:A fact from
35:
587:ClueBot III
288:Structure:
125:Start-class
70:check views
802:Categories
159:Technology
582:91.5 days
554:Archive 2
549:Archive 1
493:, or any
466:required.
430:, or any
60:Main Page
534:Archives
457:only to
249:criteria
28:deletion
707:Dieknon
629:before.
222:C-class
163:C‑class
62:in the
131:scale.
82:, the
542:Index
790:talk
740:talk
726:talk
711:talk
691:talk
670:talk
654:talk
610:Tip:
391:The
36:keep
34:was
804::
792:)
742:)
728:)
713:)
693:)
672:)
656:)
338:/
157::
788:(
738:(
724:(
709:(
689:(
668:(
652:(
228:.
216:C
194:.
137::
95:.
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
