Most western countries have committed genocide or invasion in very recent history. Either in the context of WWII, colonialism or economic interests. Countries don't magically change over night. Wouldn't it be more surprising if they didn't support their ally?

Big Israeli lobby. Bribes and Epstein blackmail.

I do think the situation is more complicated than Lemmy would have you believe.

Both Iran and Hamas have been geopolitical issues for a long time. And it's worth remembering that all of this was kicked off by a large scale terrorist attack perpetrated by Hamas.

It's also worth noting that Iran is a Russian puppet, and Europe obviously has some "neighbor problems" with Russia at the moment, so there's a sort of baked in desire to oppose their vassal states.

And, while I think everyone would agree that the loss of civilian life is terrible, there is a huge amount of misinformation that makes it hard to be sure what's going on. Hamas does have a long history of screwing over the civilian Palestinian population to further it's political goals, and so people are willing to give Israel a little more credence than they deserve when they claim things like "Hamas was hiding in that hospital" or "we're blocking aid because Hamas is hoarding it all to drive up tensions" or "it was Hamas who shot those civilians," because it actually wouldn't be the first time any of that had credibly happened. Something of a boy-cried-wolf scenario.

Add into that genuine desire to combat real anti-Semitism that's been a fallout of this whole situation (a problem that hits pretty close to home in Europe due to events of the past century), and you can see why some people might be a bit over-eager to support Israel in this conflict.

It's worth noting there are no good guys here. Israel is obviously in the wrong, and are committing horrible atrocities. I think that much is plain on its face. But Hamas and Iran have both had "the destruction of the state of Israel" as stated policy goals for the past 80 years. The reason Israel has the Iron Dome is because they've been getting missiles lobbed at them non-stop for decades.

And when there are no good guys, people tend to just align themselves with who they like more, or who they owe more to.

I can sort of see the point you’re trying to make (as I too in a comment have called for censorship but in a different and very specific context), but I feel that you’re not exactly acknowledging the issue being discussed in this thread which is that people won’t be able to state their thoughts about the government of a country that is killing people en masse.

It’s a moral position that should be easy to support: it’s wrong to ethnically cleanse a population of people.

When I commented that certain speech should be punished, it was in the context of speech that is easy to fact-check and speech that directly harms people. The expression of being against the current government of Israel doesn’t harm anyone (other than the masters behind the scenes, but even then it’s just their money/control being targeted).

Just because your argument is fallacious doesn't mean the conclusion is wrong.

"Black people are hot therefore they should be treated equally" is an example that I can immediately come up with.