Mudguard

The big jump is there to account for all the deaths that weren't reported in roughly a weeks worth of days prior to the ceasefire. These missing days are mentioned in the figure caption. Communications were essentially completely down during these periods of time, so the health ministry wasn't able to get updated numbers from their various sources, such as hospitals. Presumably, they were able to do the tally for these missing days during the ceasefire, and decided to add them when the ceasefire ended. But this has nothing to do with the reporting of the death toll since the ceasefire ended. We have daily data since then, and it's been around 300 deaths per day, which is on par with the death rate since the beginning of the war. It's very clear that there isn't a substantial decrease in the death rate since the ceasefire ended as you've claimed.

Are you serious? Your quote has nothing to do with the death rate since the resumption of war. You aren't arguing in good faith, and it's obvious you care little for facts if they don't fit your narrative. I've cited multiple reputable sources, and in response you take an out of context quote to make it seem like the death rate is now lower, when the quote actually has nothing to do with the death rate.

You've obviously misinterpreted whatever you were reading. Otherwise, provide a citation to the article.

And some more reporting, from earlier in the week from the New York times: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/12/05/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news Please post some reputable news sources that support your claim. Otherwise, I call bullshit.

I've been following the death tolls per day pretty closely, and I've see no such drop. For example, yesterday the death toll was reported as 350. It's been roughly several hundred per day since the end of the ceasefire. That's roughly the same as prior to the ceasefire. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-criticizes-israel-gaza-civilian-toll-un-hear-ceasefire-demand-2023-12-08/

I'm not comparing the first 30 days to the second 30 days. The second 30 days included the temporary ceasefire. I said since the resumption of war, the deaths per day isn't any lower.

I think this is very possible. Netanyahu's recent plan, which he has publicly announced, is for the IDF to occupy Gaza for some period of time. Maybe in this manner he will be able to continue the war at a low level until at least the end of 2024. It would actually be to his benefit, potentially, to keep the war going for years, if it allows him to drag out or postpone his legal troubles. While I am certain that many people in Netanyahu's coalition would love to expel Palestinians from Gaza, for such a plan to work would require Egypt's cooperation. I think that is going to be very difficult, but not impossible, that they could negotiate something. Sisi would need to invest is some very good security if he agreed to such a plan.

I think that's putting the cart before the horse. First and foremost, the focus needs to be on ending the slaughter of civilians. Since the resumption of war, there has been no indication that the rate of civilian casualties has gone down. Even the US is now admitting this, but so far, just empty words.

They aren't going to have a decent quality of life for a long time. Probably will have to live in tent structures for years. Probably hundreds of thousands of people will have to live like this.

I wondered about this myself, so I looked into the basis on how one of the most cited group of researches was coming up with their numbers. (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-satellite-tech-revealing-gazas-destruction/) The analysis I'm referring to is the maps with damaged buildings in yellow. See, for example: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2023/middleeast/map-humanitarian-aid-water-power-hospitals-gaza-strip-dg/index.html They are using satellite radar imaging data with 10m resolution for their analysis. Essentially, they started with a baseline image of Gaza using data from before Oct. 7/8, and stable building structures were identified. Every 5 or 6 days they construct a new image based on updated satellite radar imaging data and identify damaged structures by comparing the new image with a previous image. Since the resolution of the image is low (10m), it's not going to pick up minor damage like a broken window, or pock marks on a building. Only major damage that causes gross structural changes to the building are going to be picked up by this analysis. I think it's safe to assume that these buildings are damaged to such an extent that they are very likely unfit to be lived in or used.

Has Hamas ever invaded Israel before? I'm familiar with their rocket attacks, but I don't know if they've actually invaded Israel on a smaller scale prior to Oct. 7th. If they did invade Israel in the past, and rapes happened in the past, then that would also convince me that at a minimum, the leadership gave the green light to it even if they didn't order the rapes directly. There is definitely something to the argument that because it happened to such a large degree, that it wasn't spontaneous. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that dozens of terrorists discussed amongst themselves plans to commit rapes. Whether the leadership was aware of this, or ordered it, or gave the green light to it, who knows. Maybe. I'm suspicious that that was the case, but I would need more evidence to be sure.

Another thing regarding the rapes and Hamas leadership. The denials that any rapes occurred despite overwhelming evidence, along with the lack of punishment for the terrorists that committed these crimes if rape is against their rules, means that the Hamas leadership at least tacitly approved of the rapes of Israeli civilians, after the fact.

Like others, I also see plenty of evidence that rapes occured many times, so I have no problem believing this. Regarding the assertion that the rapes were organized, detailed plans were found with some of the killed terrorists. If the plans included instructions to rape, then that would be good evidence that the rapes were organized. I don't recall reading anything like that though, but it's possible I missed it. If you have a link to a reputable news site that provided a translation of these plans that states this, please share.

Hate speech is generally protected at universities, unless it is made against a specific person.

I agree that they handled the questions very poorly. I watched a 3 minute excerpt, and it's clear they were trying to answer the question in a way to try and head off some follow up questions that they were assuming that Stefanik was going to ask. And yeah, their answers sounded really bad. I think the better approach would have been to just directly condemn any calls for genocide, and then deal with the follow up questions separately.