For legal reasons, the question of intentionality is important. Still, for people who have genuine respect for human life and life in general, for people who would like to live in a world of peace, not racism, destruction, and savagery, the question of intentionality is secondary in a non-legal context, a country (not a group) has put plans and orders in action (1) for its army to kill nearly 25,000 (nearly 250 a day) and wound 60,000, (2) to starve more than 2 million people, and to create conditions so that half of the living population might die from diseases and epidemics, is something to be rejected categorically without second thoughts.
And for those who still wonder how to end this "situation" peacefully and protect every life in historical Palestine, there is a simple solution: israel to end its occupation and apply UN resolutions that ordered the end of occupation decades ago. It is not only a blatant travesty to speak of "complex" and "conflict"; it is a way of thinking that leads nowhere but more killing and destruction.
You might be one of those who rationalize an imaginary "complexity" so that they take no side, but the solution that respects human life is so obvious and simple: end the occupation.
The simple fact is that wanting peace means wanting the end of the occupation; if you are not interested in ending the occupation, you are not interested in peace.