The Editors at The Wall Street Journal told a sob story of countries are pushing for pause in Israeli attacks to allow more relief for civilians. Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden’s SecState Antony Blinken appears to be sympathetic to such a ceasefire:
[W]e have an obligation to do everything we can, if Hamas is not going to do it, to look out for people in Gaza. So, we are working on a mechanism that can get fuel to where it’s needed, particularly hospitals, bakeries, desalination plants.
That mechanism centers on some sort of ceasefire.
Then the Editors turned on the sobbing waterworks, crying over babies in Gaza hospital neonatal ICUs, patients requiring respiratory equipment or dialysis machines, Gaza hospitals low on fuel for their electrical power needs, and on and on, in their own support for a ceasefire. These really are tragedies in progress, but the Editors shed their crocodile tears all the while shamefully doing only a once over lightly attribution of Gazan deaths, and the increasing risks to those babies, hospital patients, and the hospitals themselves to Hamas’ use of those civilians and hospitals—and hostages—as shields for the Hamas terrorists.
No. The only beneficiary of a ceasefire—or a “temporary, localized pause” in SecState Antony Blinken’s cynical euphemism and between which NSC spokesman John Kirby so disingenuously pretends to draw a distinction—is the terrorist Hamas. Not at all beneficiary would be Gazan civilians, babies, hospital patients, hospitals, hostages, or future hostages such a payoff to the terrorists would engender.
The only ceasefire there needs to be, there should be, is the one at the end when Hamas is utterly destroyed, and there’s nothing left at which to fire.