Ok. Enough.
I usually don't step in this kind of stuff but now it's going too far.
I don't care about romaioi or romaioktonoi, Carthaginian history goes far beyond its conflict with Rome and as flashy and enticing it might be (I'm not immune to the charms of the barcids either) it would be like reducing (with the due adjustments) German and French history to the world wars.

Cato's party (and the greedy newly rich class that used him as flagbearer in the senate) aside neither faction intended to raze the other to the ground.

To put it on the point of view of the protagonists after Zama:

- Scipio Africanus saw Carthage as the stone that would keep Rome's edge sharp in the future

- Hannibal had a similar view about Rome in case of victory, and in defeat he was the one that told the more warlike senators in Carthage to shut up and prepare to work on rebuilding their fortunes

So, who are we after over 2000 years to go and use such a football fan attitude in what was at the time a conflict of almost unseen proportion?