The mutual bloodshed is terrible, and, as a resident of Tel Aviv I'm personally affected, but there is one thing that has always perplexed me a bit, which is the perception of the actual ferocity of the conflict. Obviously, every death is a terrible loss, but this forum is fond of numbers, so while we're on the subject, here are some numbers:
The total number of deaths in the entire Israeli-Arab conflict over the past 70 years or so, is - according to Wikipedia - under 100,000. Out of which, about 25,000 are Israeli, a similar number are Palestinians, and the rest, I guess are casualties of all the other fighting arab countries combined, although the total seems to me a bit high. That's the total for the past 70 years.
By comparison, in the Libyan and Syrian civil wars, Wikipedia puts the number of deaths at about 30,000 in each country in the last year alone. And the Mexican drug war has claimed the lives of about 56,000 since 2006; some estimates go as high as 100,000.
So, not to compare suffering, but the entire Israeli-Arab conflict has claimed, over the last 70 years, more or less the same number of lives as the drug war in Mexico in the past 6.
In short, both sides are trying to recruit the world's support for what is, in reality, a very low-intensity conflict compared to just about any other violent conflict, anywhere else in the world.
It's more medium-intensity than low-intensity. Yes, it's not open war. But neither is it as low-key as IRA bombings or Basque separatism. The Israeli-Arab conflict not only has a ton of money flowing in from other sources, it's also something of a proxy war from bigger players. The same can't be said of things like the Second Congo War - the most deadly war since WWII, but was geopolitically unimportant, and holds no benefit or kudos for the major players if they did get involved. The Israeli-Arab conflict also affects a lot of people and politics outside the Levant - both sides have a lot of prominent political and financial agitators. Compare to Cambodia's killing fields, an internal event with over a million dead... that had very little effect outside the country, and little in the way of agitators to draw attention.
So why do people harp on about the Israeli-Arab conflict? Because Israelis and Arabs keep on demanding the world's attention over the conflict, really.
Those pictures under the #GazaUnderAttack are often fake (e.g. from other conflicts, such as Syria) as pointed out by the BBC [1] just yesterday.
Twitter posts are about as useful and hysterical (and in the literal meaning, not funny) as YouTube comments and for the large part do nothing to promote useful discussion or accurate reporting.
More to the point, why are you politicizing a discussion that so far has been thankfully apolitical?
I find it strange that you created an account less than 20 minutes ago to take part in the "political discussion" yourself, unless you're working professionally as part of the "hasbara" effort?!
Which photos are the BBC referring to? They don't reference them so that calls into question the veracity of their claims.
Did you seriously just write that? As in you are trying to have more Israelis killed so there will be balance?
Tell me I misunderstood you.