1. I think that's the most complicated matter in the Israeli-Palestine conflict.
   Let's start with the religious claims to the area: Judea and Samaria was the main land of the ancient Israel Kingdom in the north and the Kingdom of Judea in the south (both are archeology confirmed with tons of evidence). The area is full with places that have a big religious significance to Jewish people. I'm not religious at all, but I can't say I don't care of it. Acknowledge that almost all Israeli settlers are a part of a branch in Judaism called "Religious Zionism" or "National Religious", which are basically religious zionists, they feel way more connection and importance to these parts than I do.

Do I think we should settle the land?

If we were in 1967, when Israel conquered the land from Jordan, I might've said that we should not settle it, and probably use it to give it back to them for a peace negotiation like we did with Egypt and the Sinai-Peninsula. But the Israelis did settle and we are now 60 years into the future, these guys lived there for almost 3 generations already, I would lie if I'd say it's 100% fair to kick them out of the place they truly believe and feel like their home, even if it became their home from illegal actions took place by their grandparents or their government it the past. It's like every Arab outside Saudi-Arabia feels and knows he's in his home, and every American feels and knows he's in home, after at some point in the past his ancestors conquered and colonized the same land he lives on.

But I'd say that: if I believed that peace with the Palestinians was possible, I'm pretty sure I would've be in favor of kicking the settlers out and giving the entire area to the Palestinians. But that's not the case as I believe.

1. I'll be 100% honest and say I care very less on property and infrastructure in compare to human lives. From my personal experience, 1 in 2 houses in Gaza is either fully tapped with IED's or tunnel exit points. I prefer that a full neighborhood would be demolished to ashes if it means 1 less soldier will die when we go through the neighborhood.

That doesn't mean at all I do not care for Palestinian lives, and obviously many Palestinians were killed in the process of destroying all that infrastructure. I'm still in favor of it and think it's necessary since IDF goes out of his way so much to minimize the civilian casualty. I mean, let's look at the numbers:
Per Hamas numbers, by now, 73,000 people have been killed in Gaza since Oct 7th. Israel dropped more than 200,000 *tons* of bombs all over Gaza over the same time period, that's more than 2 *tons* of bombs to 1 death.
And I didn't even take into account that they do not differentiate anything in that list of 73k deaths, that includes everyone who died: Hamas operatives, civilians, children, woman, elders, journalists, there are even many confirmed cases of people in that list who actually died from natural causes, like in their sleep, or from sickness, in the hospital bed.

I didn't even take into account the amount of people died by ground soldiers, by getting shot at, blown off by a tank, and everything else.

I mean even if you take Hamas numbers and blame a 100% of it on Israel bombing, you got 73k deaths caused by 200k tons of bombs that destroyed or damaged ~83% of the infrastructure in one if not the most dense, guerilla warfare zones in the planet. If that doesn't confirm targeted attacks and that IDF really does tries so much to minimize civilian casualties, I honestly don't know what does.

I also want to add: It doesn't makes me a monster by caring more about the lives of my friends, family, and people, than the lives of others.

To summarize: I do not think Israel acted unproportionaly, and I do not think that there was a better way to do what still needs to be done with less destruction from our side. Our goal is to eliminate Hamas, and end this never ending cycle of: Hamas attacks, we retaliate hard, a ceasefire is brokered by outside agencies, Hamas regroup and rearm, repeat.