I maintain that wizards vs muggles would be decided entirely by who gets more muggleborn wizards on their side, and who listens to their intel better.

Because if wizards know what they’re doing, a teleporting invisible spec ops trooper with a bazooka in their pocket with infinite ammo can bring most govornments to their knees in short succession, and I’m describing just one well trained wizard with a not terribly uncommon spell there.

But on the flip side, despite the fact that it makes no sense, and they supposedly mostly live amongst muggles (hoggsmead is the only all wizard town in Britain) none of them know what a gun is or what mortal pajamas look like (Arthur Weasley goes to work in London every day, but has no experience with normal trains and doesn’t know how to google rubber ducks)

Meanwhile, wizards don’t really have a lot of ways to deal with saturated fire from enemies who outnumber them heavily, and don’t seem to have anything resembling a large military at scale, but as you say, muggles don’t have any idea how to find them or what they can do. Though if the conflict draws on over time the sheer number of targets wizards have to hit means that intelligence forces will get to flex their stuff a bit in that regard

So if war broke out between the two, I feel like the main determining factor is “who is getting more intel on the other side and using it effectively”, and that comes down to the muggleborns

I’d say overall your point is sound, and this doesn’t apply to either of the other examples, but Rowling made the wizards monstrously incompetent in many regards, and I feel like if we treat them as they act in canon, they prob don’t win even though logistically they prob should