"The soldiers destroyed the whole city, including the palace."
Translation:La soldatoj detruis la tutan urbon, inkluzive la palacon.
inkluzive is an adverb. You cannot use it as preposition. If you want to add something you can use either de – inluzive da la palaco, ene de la domo – or in this case it is logic to use the accusative with palaco – … inkluzive la palacon.
That doesn't seem right, because I believe you could say:
La homoj estas bonaj, kompreneble malperfektaj.
Also, why is it logical to use the accusative? What are some other similar uses that are analogous?
It is quite common in Esperanto to drop prepositions and use the accusative to represent them.
Ni iris la domon / ni iris al la domo
"Ni iris la domon" looks wrong to me. I asked for a second opinion on Telegram, and someone also thought so. In the PMEG, using a solitary N-ending on an O-word without any rolmontrilo (preposition) in front of it is mostly only used for proper names of cities, countries, and so on, and only when speaking of going inside of something. http://bertilow.com/pmeg/gramatiko/rolmontriloj/n/direkto.html
That page of PMEG civers specifically tge accusative for direction. It is not being argued against or anything.
Here is a PMEG reference showing how to use the accusative for this case in particular: http://bertilow.com/pmeg/gramatiko/frazpartoj/e-vortaj_frazpartoj.html
I linked to that page of the PMEG because it is about the N-ending on an O-word (one case of the "accusative of direction"). The page describes its limited use, which suggests that your use of it is unusual.
The Wikipedia page only uses the N-ending without a preposition in a completely different grammatical construction ("ili iros la trian de majo").