Looking at these numbers with a little bit of "not rabidly anti Israel" spectacles,
I see that it claims that 43% of the population is under 14 and I would assume children are also those 18 and under which to me would then imply a higher number still under 18.
So, the tragic deaths of 541 children of a total of 2016 is only 26.8% substantially less than even the under 14 years percentage (43%). The number of women being (for assumption 50% of the remaining 57% over 14) would mean 250 and 50 (more than half of the elderly quoted below) which is 300/2016 14.88%...again much lower than half of 57% (28.5%).
So, that to me looks like the remainder of the casualties are men and boys aged over 14. Whilst I would still classify under 18 as a child, this remaining figure is 1063 after I have stripped out the last four non-combatants.
We therefore arrive at a fatality figure of 52.7% being men who are potential combatants (1063/2016). This is significantly greater than the percentage this age group makes of the population. Obviously not all of them are combatants but I would reckon that a significant portion are.
If we look at the injuries, 30% are children and 19% women (both less then that demographic). The balance of 4688 (46%) would therefore be men of combatant age which is again, significantly higher then that demographic (28.5%).
I just used your figures so I am not sure we can dispute the "source" or the "facts".
What I (and I think most non-foaming at the mouth pro-Palestinians) would therefore infer from the above is, tragic though the above civilian casualties are, the women and children component is significantly less than their demographic make up, the potential combatant age is significantly more than their demographic make up.
That is RESTRAINT.
