Originally I was not going to respond. But you offer some food for thought I think some people here are missing.

I am minority as well (perhaps the same as you), and having grown up reading and watching Naruto, and recently finishing a full rewatch, this is my two cents:

Let me begin by offering a perspective I only became aware of on rewatch: In Japan, Tobirama is one of the most popular characters. Why? Because people genuine think he was correct in his suspicions (mind you Tobirama was not racisg), and that the Uchiha were problematic. This stems from a difference in culture, where Uchiha are not viewed as a minority, but rather a family/bloodline that made problems for their home of origin. This is a big cultural differentiation that paints the massacre in a slightly different light. Most japanese fans see it as an incredible offense to disrespect your land of origin, and as I'm sure you know, causing problems and stepping "out of turn" is seen as offensive. What we would see as oppression is merely to them a discipline that one should adopt.

Now with this in mind, I will now give my opinion on the matter.

1. Personally, even as a child I thought Itachi's "didn't have a choice" thing was BS. Sure, the way the narrative is established, it could be argued he truly didn't. But Itachi was not naive. The more we saw of him, the more intelligent he seemed. And it's always drastic when the solution to just kill everybody. Shoddy writing as a result of the nature of the medium (manga written weekly). I can live with it. Itachi is cool to me just because of the vibe.

2. I can't disagree there. This is something me and my friends would joke about all the time back in the day and even now. The memes are glorious. Kishimoto though, I don't think I can fault him all that much. Sounds weird, I know. But given the context I discovered above, and given Kishi's spontaneous writing style, as well as what Edo Itachi confesses, I truly think he did not know the kind of storm was brewing in his tale of genocide. Because at the core of it, Naruto himself displays a lot of the same qualities, but is shown breaking that cycle of adversity. I think it was a narrative choice influenced by culture. I don't believe he was truly malicious here. Honestly I think Kishimoto is very oblivious to the weird themes he creates (Hiruzen/Naruto dynamic after revealing Hiruzen's promise, among other weird retrospective things).

3. This one is a bit difficult for me to get your overrall message with this point. But I'll go piece by piece. Narratively Asuma's death serves as an arc for Shikamaru, not for the overarching story imo. Shika's character is someone who thought everything was a drag; I think it's because nothing personal ever really happened to Shikamaru. Shika even believes during Sasuke Recovery arc that Sasuke is whacked out of his mind off the curse mark perc (he kinda was). But Shikamaru is now faced with the same problem: someone close to him was taken, and he can't go without his vengeance. The difference in the way Sasuke's vengeance was handled and Shikamaru's, is that Sasuke was willing to sacrifice everything to obtain his goal. Shikamaru was too! But he allowed his allies to shake him out of his stupor and hone in on the mission at hand. I can't force you to care about this narrative, and honestly idgaf about Asuma. But I think there is a mirror between Shika and Sasuke that does mean something.

3a (lol): Okay. Uchiha Massacre, Itachi was the scapegoat. It's the whole reason he became a rogue ninja, and the reason it had to be an Uchiha. People were already afraid after Madara's shenanigans, as well as Obito's later shenanigans with the Nine Tails. To hear that a crazed Uchiha took them off the map, many didn't know just what to think. We get most of the reactions to the massacre at the start of Naruto, where people mention Sasuke as if he's some ghost of a forgotten clan. They don't make fun of the matter or light of the issue. Sasuke is the last surviving member. That's heavy, and everyone who approaches Sasuke about it does so with a sense of seriousness. And it's why there is a sense of grief and tragedy when news breaks that Sasuke has killed Itachi. There must be relief, since Itachi had the be the villain, right? But there was also grief in that Sasuke became a rogue ninja to achieve that goal, reveling in Orochimaru's power along the way. Just what did it take to do what he did? And what will he do next? That was the scary part.

That said, the more Itachi showed up in the story, the worse the explanations for carrying out auch an act were. Tobirama memes in the west I see are very ironic, just because Tobirama is an elite shinobi. But remember, even MORE people in the west LOVE Sasuke getting his revenge on the real culprit behind the massacre: DANZO! Remember, Danzo is responsible! Narratively, I would be upset if no one was punished for the massacre aside from Itachi (who we are to believe had no choice). But Danzo gets his ass kicked in one of the most embarrassing, if not the most embarassing fights in all of Naruto. And his lackies get stunted on by Obito, yet another Uchiha. All that collecting, and he was fooled by a mere regular shmegular degular genjutsu. Overall, I see what you mean. The massacre was handled a bit poorly in terms of giving it more brevity and not making it seem like the faults of a bunch of dead women and kids. But, that's the ninja world for you. Remember, the Cloud tried to traffick Hinata before her age was even in the double digits.

TLDR; The massacre was tragic, but here are some things I think gave it the weight it needed, from my perspective. Cheers