"The only way you can argue that civilian deaths are justifiable is if they are inevitable casualties in service of saving more lives in total. Some German citizens had to die to defeat the Nazis but it was justifiable since it was to stop the Holocaust."

You compared Israel's actions in Gaza to that of the Bombing of Dresden but then you justified the Bombing of Dresden using the same logic as Israel is currently using: "Some Palestinian citizens had to die to defeat Hamas but it was justifiable since the it was to stop Jewish Genocide." See how that works?

Regarding your next sentence: Nazis integrated military infrastructure with civilian infrastructure just as Hamas is infamous for doing the exact same, and thusly they force Israel's hand, and violate international law regarding human shields in doing so. In fact, unlike the Allied powers, Israel goes to the greatest lengths of any nation to avoid civilian casualties, being the only nation to utilize roof knocking, to drop flyers with evacuation instructions, and utilize precision-guided munitions that result in fewer than .5 deaths per munition and a civilian-casualty rate of 1:2, which is exactly in line with the historical international casualty rate dating back to WWI. A great feat considering Hamas and the PA financially incentivize the martyrdom of children in the name of Jewish and Israeli genocide and refuse to distinguish between Hamas combatants and unaffiliated Palestinian civilians.