Not for the dead. I don't like this argument because it's the same one we used in Iraq to make ourselves feel better about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who were "collateral damage" in our war there. It's murder no matter what term is used in its place.
going into a settlement and deliberately shooting, stabbing, and executing unarmed civilians in hand to hand, is clearly wrong - black and white. Equivalent to murder.
aerial bombing is more shades of gray, it's not as clean as people make it out to be. Rather it depends on the circumstances, and we don't get the circumstances shared with us. For example, is it a group of 100 and 99 of them are terrorists and one is a civilian - bomb it imo. However, if it's one terrorist in a group of 100, don't bomb it. But when it's more 35:65, do you bomb it? To me it's more like manslaughter, still bad, but it's not murder.
Based on what I've seen over the years with journalists being allowed into Hamas tunnels and camps, Hamas has made secret tunnels that are deep underneath the city, with supplies, electricity, weapons, etc. Israel does the bombings to collapse the tunnel network and in essence, bury them alive. But in doing so, they miss and hit civilian buildings or hit the target but the blast radius is so wide that it destroys the building anyways. They also target buidlings that are seen sending out rockets - they have ariel footage that can pick out individual people on the buildings and can see what they are doing. People in media or in public discourse have incorrectly framed it as Israel cynically claiming that every building hit has Hamas in it and carpet bombing the city. That's not the dynamic.
I don't think it's an indiscriminate bombing campaign or that they are actually targeting hospitals for the purpose of disrupting medical care. But that doesn't mean I sign off on what they're doing, especially the denial of food, water and electricity.