Do you think it is IDF's moral responsibility to protect civilians? Do you think they are doing reasonable job?

This is my view as well.

I don't agree with "entirely". IDF is not doing enough to minimize civilian casualties. For example, blockade of delivery of humanitarian aid and ongoing famine in Gaza is fully on IDF. Another example is using kill zones, where IDF indiscriminately kills anyone moving. In such zones there isn't even an attempt to minimize civilian casualties, which is never OK.

These massive deficits are driving inflation, Canada is well into "run out of other people's money" phase.

I read it, and don't find that response credible. Apparently there were 3 strikes on the convoy, where multiple times survivors got into remaining cars. Apparently IDF was informed in advance and approved convoy's route and cargo and were contacted again shortly after initial strike. That makes accident a lot less likely. I see it as deliberate targeting.

I absolutely will. Palestinians elected terrorist government that committed multiple war crimes and have a publicly stated goal of eradicating Israel. Israel is entitled to defend itself by retaliating proportionally. A lot of what happening right now in Gaza is well-deserved "find out" phase.

None of this changes the fact that IDF is also committing war crimes. Unless your view that there is no civilians in Palestine.

Are there worse kinds of war crimes? Absolutely. However, IDF conduct in Palestine meets my definition of war crimes. I get it that Israel is in a situation where all alternatives are bad, but that does not change the fact that the alternative they picked includes war crimes.

You are willfully ignorant of facts if you think these accusations are invented.

October 7 was used as an excuse to conflate any criticism of Israel as antisemitism and call for censorship. For example, Ben Shapiro and DailyWire fired Candice Owens for criticizing Israel and US funding of IDF. The same Ben Shapiro that was famous for "Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings". Apparently, "yours" in his statement was not self-inclusive. Similarly, Dave Rubin cheered for EU laws banning pro-Palestine protests. These people were prominent in conservative circles for advocacy of free speech and opposition to Left's cancel culture only to perpetuate the same from the right.

Here is an example after quick search with non-Google search engine.

It is both accurate and pedantic to object to my use of 'censored'. I am not a fan of using neologisms like deboosted and the net effect - fewer people are aware of the facts - is the result.

Principles is a luxury belief that you can afford due to excess merit.

I am not trying to bash you, and not trying to be overly cynical. I also try to follow my principles and have suffered (in lost opportunities) as a consequence. However, there is a limit to what I am able to achieve, as 'have nothing' is not option available to me as there are others that depend on my earnings.

It is not that bad. More accurately, ass kissing and sycophancy is by far easier advancement path than pure merit.

After events of October 7, 2023 and IDF occupation of Gaza this is no longer true statement.

I find your naivety endearing.

What evidence do you have that the observable direct cause is not the reason? Occam's razor this please.