People are saying Israel is justified in escalating the conflict after October 7th. They’re saying escalation in response to attacks is justified.
The poster you’re replying to is saying that, since people are making the argument that “escalations are justified”, they should be consistent and fair with their stance.
To be consistent and fair with the stance that “escalations are justified”, Palestine/Hamas escalating the conflict would also be justified.
So if Hamas started bombing Israel, that would be justified under that se argument that “escalations are justified”.
The problem is that (as the other commenter is alluding to), nobody is making the argument that “escalations in response to an attack is justified”. They’re really saying “only Israel is allowed to escalate the conflict”.
Which is a stupid argument when revealed for what it really means. It’s just dressed up in a way that sounds nice. “Escalations are only fair after a brutal attack” is just another kind of “All lives matter”*. Sounds nice, but the underlying motive is bad or unsound.
“All lives matter” referring to the response to the BLM slogan/movement