This thread is about current things happening in Gaza though - the red herring fallacy to other atrocities around the world isn't relevant at all.
This is why I'm asking what the long term plan is for the day after the war has ended - it's important to know what the plan is to make an assessment of intentionality.
Currently the plan seems to revenge on all of Gaza, not only the destruction of Hamas but the destruction of Gaza and the people in it? The membership of Hamas is estimated to be 20-25,000 maximum - why is Israel seeing 2 million plus people (50% under 18) as collateral damage? Even if Hamas sees them as human shields, Israel has a responsibility to ensure they are not collateral damage. Israel are aggressors because of politics, territory and religion. Hamas are aggressors because of politics, territory and religion. Those people are not party to it. Why is the war going to be, according to Netanyahu 'long and difficult'? To get rid of 25k terrorists? Why does it need to 'get worse before it gets better'? If escalation means aggression towards funding and supporting Hamas, who as far as I can see are Iran and Russia, what's the plan there? Who gave Israel permission to white knight the world? US? The West?
This conflict isn't helping the safety of anyone. Hamas have 100% responsibility for opening the can of worms to empower antisemitism around the world - there is a hotel in Russia with a sign saying 'Israelis are not welcome - that means Jews' - that absolutely is on Hamas. However, Israel isn't trying to put the lid back on that can of worms in any way shape or form, it's not even bothered about it's hostages, there seems to be no movement towards peace at all but an escalation of a situation that threatens world stability - if we have another war there is going to be a continued loss of civilians, the world markets are already showing signs of nerves, oil will increase next year, interest rates will rise, inflation will increase and a world recession is possible. Countries need to show a responsibility when retaliating against terrorists, when escalation has wider consequences.