I think the "truth is in the middle" can apply to cases where there was a tit-for-tat escalation that ended in shared responsibility

But most of the time I think the "truth is in the middle" reasoning ends up leading people to taking nonsensical or contradictory views. People need to be willing to wrestle with ideas until they can say something is true. Often times people try to take a middle of the road position because a) they don't understand what they're talking about or b) nuance views so much that it just becomes ambiguous.