I would think that anyone advocating for or cheering the death of civilians would be valid reason for removal. Criticizing Israeli policy, being supportive of Palestinians in general, or contradicting Netanyahu's talking points: not a valid reason for removal.

How do you feel about posts supporting the bombing of Dresden, Tokyo, or the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Those aren't great either, but a mitigating factor is that those things happened a long time ago in conflicts that have already ended and few of the people involved are even alive anymore. It's not like the United States is seriously considering firebombing Desden or Tokyo or using nuclear weapons against Japan again in 2025. (At least, not yet as far as we know.) Having opinions about history is different than having opinions about an ongoing war.

There's also a difference between people who say that those attacks were a least-bad option to win the war from a utilitarian ethics point of view versus people (presumably a minority) who simply see no down-side at all to deliberately killing large numbers of German or Japanese civilians.

I guess as "violating facebook terms of use". At some point i don't think what the standard is matters that much as long as its equally enforced against everyone.

Generally though i do think its legit for facebook to take down posts advocating for violence and terrorism. Devil is in the details.