Earlier quoted context omitted.
The majority of deaths in the war in Syria have also been combatants with only being minority civilians, a substantial minority certainly but I suspect there's a reasonable minority of "civilians" killed in Brazilian drug wars. This 63K killed/year figure seems to exceed some years of the Syrian civil war. Brazil is a larger country but the drug war is concentrated in a minority of the country. The one thing you're n…
Thanks for that. I was sceptical and went for a dig. In most conflicts the civilian to combatant death ratio is high, with numbers like 9:1 cited. This is probably over estimated but having a civilian toll lower than combatant is unusual. As far as I can tell Syria has a toll of about 3.5 combatants to each civilian. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio
After WWI, "total warfare" targeting the entire population and productive capacity of the enemy in a mechanized fashion seemed like the logical direction in which war would go. The reality has been somewhat different, with guerrilla warfare and other asymmetrical approaches making political dimensions important also, where on the one hand avoiding unneeded deaths is often a useful political strategy and on the other hand, if the enemy is essentially hardened guerrillas with rocket launchers hiding in caves and supported from outside, that enemy may not be sensitive to the mass destruction of the population and productive capacity of the area. Both these situation make "total war" a less effective strategy (witness the different casualty ratios of the first and second Chechen wars).