I will address everything in your reply, but I want to preface it with something.

When I said "In fairness, they didn't. The person they replied to did." I was not expressing my agreement with the "both things can be bad" statement, I was simply pointing out that the first person to draw any connection or comparison at all between Ukraine and Palestine was @Anti. Purely from a standpoint of the words they used. I do not think they are comparable, but without any context of what @Anti thinks about the invasion of Ukraine it is just an objective truth that they were the first person to make a link between the two. Of course thereafter, the person you replied to made the "both things can be bad" point, but yeah. Maybe I'm just being autistic.

No disagreements at all with your 2nd paragraph, and that was indeed my reading of your initial response.

Fully on board with your 3rd paragraph.

Again, fully agree with your 4th paragraph.

And here at your 5th paragraph we arrive at where I have been misunderstood. @Anti absolutely wouldn't have been "more valid" if they'd written it differently, I am not policing their tone, their point was succinct and true. My initial comment was not an implication that @Anti believed a "both things bad" argument, I was purely stating a fact about the words used. The first user to draw a comparison between the two situations was @Anti, purely in terms of the words used. Had they phrased it differently, they may not have been the first person to do so, and I wouldn't have been able to make my tongue in cheek throwaway comment. This doesn't mean to say that they should have phrased it differently, or that they were wrong, or that the "both bad" argument is right.

I hope we are both/all in understanding. And thanks for not spewing vitriol at me for making a poorly executed half-joke.