No, but suggesting I am "influenced by tribal motivations" while asking for evidence is. You're mixing an insult with a request for information; you've already decided I am wrong.

Given your own charge that other people are mindkilled it's interesting that you see that charge as an insult and not as a factual description. I didn't intent to insult, but to state a hypothesis. A hypothesis that I stated with the word "maybe" to mark uncertainty. Don't generalize from one example.

Stating a hypothesis does not mean I decided that believe a certain outcome. It just put forward a point about which I intent to communicate.

Fighting the hypothetical

The opposite of fighting the hypothetical is to avoid critical thinking and not challenge it's assumptions.

The problem with the hypothetical is that it ignores how beliefs in a society actually form. That's a process that's vital to the topic at hand. At a core it assumes that a society has beliefs about a war hold 50 years ago that have nothing to do with propaganda.

It's a point that I might made irrespectable of whether the story I'm reading favors a group that I support politically.

There are real criticisms to be made, and their absence is quite conspicuous given the strongly negative tone of the commentary.

What does "conspicuous" mean here? That you should treat people as being an enemy tribe? That's tribal thinking.

It's not thinking though the actual concent of the post.