NO THANKS TO PRESIDENT TRUMP

The Gaza ceasefire is a necessary relief for a starving, shattered people. It is not a favor from Washington—certainly not from President Trump, a possible war criminal whose prosecution needs to be submitted to the ICC. The United States helped arm the devastation, moved unconscionably late, and tried to kneecap the very court tasked with accountability. Justice means food, medicine, and law—not applause. [1][2][5][12

---

The ceasefire is necessary—but nobody owes Trump thanks

The announced arrangement includes hostage–prisoner exchanges, partial Israeli withdrawal, and increased humanitarian access, with a U.S.-backed civil–military coordination cell to help monitor and implement. [1][2][3][4] Necessary? Yes. Overdue? Profoundly. An act worthy of gratitude to President Trump? No.

“Famine is no longer a looming possibility—it is a present-day catastrophe.” [8][9][10]

Two years of siege and bombardment hollowed out Gaza’s health system and basic services. A ceasefire that arrives after hospitals have been repeatedly overwhelmed and food systems deliberately constricted is more triage than triumph. You don’t thank the arsonist for bringing a late bucket.

Why “no thanks” is the only honest reply

1) U.S. complicity: financing and fueling the destruction

The Brown University Costs of War project documents extensive U.S. military support and transfers sustaining Israeli operations from late 2023 through 2025. This wasn’t passive complicity; it was an active supply chain for air and ground warfare. [5][6] You cannot bankroll devastation and then demand credit for facilitating a pause.

2) Far, far too late for credit

Conservative, UN-cited figures place the documented direct death toll in Gaza around 67,000–70,000 by early October 2025, with hundreds of thousands injured. [5][11][17] And direct deaths are only part of the story. Modern conflicts produce indirect deaths—from hunger, disease, untreated injuries, and collapsed sanitation—that often exceed blast trauma. Costs of War synthesizes this literature and warns totals will rise as data improves. [5][6]

About the 680,000 figure:
Scholars Richard Hil and Gideon Polya model indirect deaths at roughly four for every one direct violent death, drawing on public-health commentary and conflict-mortality literature. Applying that 4:1 ratio to an assumed direct-death baseline (~136,000 by April 25, 2025) yields an estimated ~680,000 total deaths (direct + indirect), including a very large share of children. This is not an official UN tally; it is a research-based advocacy estimate intended to capture hidden lethality from siege-driven deprivation. We include it transparently alongside conservative, documented counts. [24][25][20]

3) Name the pattern: Israeli terrorism

When entire neighborhoods are flattened, when starvation unfolds in full view of satellites and diplomats, and when civilians are systematically denied essentials, communities will name it plainly: Israeli terrorism. Rights groups and UN entities have warned of practices—including collective punishment—categorically prohibited by international humanitarian law. The ceasefire doesn’t erase that record; it puts it under a brighter light. [8][9][10][11][19]

4) The “one phone call” test—and historical precedent

U.S. presidents have restrained Israeli military action before. President Eisenhower forced a withdrawal during the 1956 Suez Crisis through hard-nosed financial and diplomatic leverage. [21] During Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, President Reagan sent envoy Philip Habib to press repeatedly for ceasefires. [22][23] The point is not nostalgia; it’s capacity. A White House willing to expend political capital can change outcomes early. Instead, the 2025 Trump administration sanctioned the International Criminal Court and spent months boosting impunity narratives before shepherding a late ceasefire. [12][13]

5) Dehumanizing rhetoric → dehumanizing policy

Treating Gaza as a real-estate problem to be “redeveloped” after depopulation invites atrocity. Language matters because it sanctions the unthinkable. Calling Gazans obstacles, or reducing their mass graves to planning opportunities—even obliquely—licenses further harm. The damage from this rhetoric is not reversible by a signing ceremony.

6) Accountability under law, not PR

On Feb. 6, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14203, imposing sanctions on the ICC and its staff—an astonishing move against a court created to address exactly this kind of crisis. [12][13] Amnesty International and UN experts warned it undermines victims’ access to justice and chills investigations. [12][1search5] That’s the opposite of responsible leadership.

Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal at the ICC: judges have kept the arrest warrants active for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. [14][15][16] As for Trump: we state clearly—consistent with our principles—that he is a possible war criminal whose prosecution needs to be submitted to the ICC. Courts determine criminal guilt; communities decide what truths they refuse to bury.

“The decisions of courts must be respected and complied with.” [16]

7) A ceasefire amid famine is survival, not peace

The Famine Review Committee (IPC’s independent check) confirmed famine (IPC Phase 5) in Gaza Governorate in August 2025 and warned of spread without dramatic access improvements. [8][9][10] That means high crude death rates, acute malnutrition, and avoidable deaths—especially among children—even as bombs quiet. A ceasefire helps, but it cannot, by itself, reverse mass wasting or rebuild the medical system.

8) “Ceasefire” has often been treated like a loophole

Previous pauses saw repeated violations and lethal incidents during supposed lulls. Early reporting on the latest deal is already peppered with compliance fears. Durable peace requires verification mechanisms, public reporting, and real consequences for violations—not just vague promises. [3][4][11]

---

What accountability would actually look like

Condition the weapons
Make U.S. arms contingent on adherence to international humanitarian law—no exemptions, no winks. When violations are credibly documented, shipments stop. That’s how you prevent the next round. [5][6]

Un-handcuff the courts
Reverse U.S. sanctions on the ICC. Cooperate with investigations, whoever they implicate. If law only applies to enemies, it’s propaganda, not justice. [12][13][16]

Open the gates—fully
Ceasefire or not, full humanitarian access is non-negotiable: restore water, food, medical supply lines, power, and shelter materials at scale—monitored and published daily. [8][9][10][11]

A political horizon that ends military rule
UN experts and human-rights law are unambiguous: meaningful peace requires self-determination and an end to practices amounting to collective punishment and annexation by settlement. [11][19]

---

Dearborn’s stance—human first, always

This city knows solidarity in its bones. Mutual-aid drives when crossings choke. Teachers turning classrooms into sanctuaries. Mosques, churches, and community centers becoming logistics hubs overnight. That’s why the tone here is firm: we do not thank leaders who armed this catastrophe for finally agreeing to pause it. We demand food convoys at scale, functioning hospitals, and judges allowed to do their work.

“Relief is not absolution; a pause is not justice.”

The Green Party platform’s compass—peace, human rights, ecological and social repair—translates into simple policy: stop collective punishment, respect courts, tie aid to law, and build a political path out of siege and occupation. That’s the road from ceasefire to future.

So again: NO THANKS TO PRESIDENT TRUMP. Save gratitude for the medics running on fumes, the aid workers threading checkpoints, the families who still carve a life from rubble. Save gratitude for anyone who treats Gazans not as a real-estate problem but as neighbors with inviolable rights.

---

---

Counting the dead—documented vs. modeled totals

Documented direct deaths: ~67,000–70,000 Palestinians as of Oct. 2025, reported by Gaza health authorities and collated by Reuters and research syntheses. [5][11][17]

Modeled total deaths (680,000): Dr. Richard Hil and Dr. Gideon Polya (Arena) apply a 4:1 indirect-to-direct mortality ratio—citing global-health commentary and conflict literature—to an assumed ~136,000 direct deaths by April 25, 2025. Their model yields a ~680,000 total (direct + indirect). This is not a UN figure; it’s a research-based advocacy estimate to capture siege-driven starvation and disease deaths likely missing from tallies. [24][25][20]

Why we show both: In wartime, precision and transparency are a duty to the dead and the living. Publishing the conservative documented count alongside the modeled total gives readers honest guardrails on scale while avoiding misleading certainty.

---

Sources

1. Reuters — “US to deploy 200 troops for Gaza task force with no operations on ground in Gaza” (Oct. 9, 2025). Reuters
2. AP News — “US is sending about 200 troops to Israel to help support and monitor the Gaza ceasefire deal” (Oct. 10, 2025). AP News
3. The Guardian — “US to send 200 troops to Israel to support and monitor ceasefire deal” (Oct. 9, 2025). The Guardian
4. Reuters (live) — “Gaza ceasefire updates: US to deploy 200 troops for task force” (Oct. 9, 2025). Reuters
5. Costs of War (Brown Univ.) — The Human Toll of the Gaza War: Direct and Indirect Death from 7 Oct 2023 to 3 Oct 2025 (Oct. 2025) PDF. Costs of War
6. Costs of War (web summary) — “Human Toll of the Gaza War” (accessed Oct. 10, 2025). Costs of War
7. WHO / IPC — “Famine confirmed for first time in Gaza” news release (Aug. 22, 2025). World Health Organization
8. IPC Famine Review Committee (UN ODS) — Gaza Strip: FRC Report (Aug. 22, 2025) PDF. United Nations
9. UNISPAL Monthly Bulletin — “Famine confirmed in Gaza; IPC FRC” (Sept. 15, 2025). United Nations
10. IPC Global Initiative (DG ECHO) — Special Snapshot: Gaza Acute Food Insecurity & Malnutrition (Aug. 22, 2025) PDF. European Civil Protection
11. Reuters — “How many Palestinians has Israel’s Gaza offensive killed?” (Oct. 7, 2025). Reuters
12. White House — “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court” (Exec. Order 14203, Feb. 6, 2025). The White House
13. U.S. Treasury (OFAC) — “Issuance of Executive Order Imposing Sanctions on the ICC” (Feb. 13, 2025). OFAC
14. ICC (Office of the Prosecutor / Court) — Prosecutor statement on issuance of arrest warrants; State of Palestine case pages (Nov. 21, 2024). International Criminal Court
15. Reuters — “ICC judges reject Israel’s request to withdraw Netanyahu arrest warrant” (July 16, 2025). Reuters
16. OHCHR — “ICC arrest warrants must be respected and complied with — UN experts” (Nov. 26, 2024). OHCHR
17. Wikipedia (aggregated with citations) — “Casualties of the Gaza war” (accessed Oct. 10, 2025). Wikipedia
18. Le Monde diplomatique — “The deadly battle over demography” (Oct. 4, 2025). Le Monde Diplomatique
19. The Guardian / +972 / Local Call — “Israeli military’s own data indicates civilian death rate of 83%” (Aug. 21, 2025). The Guardian
20. The Guardian — “Why researchers fear the Gaza death toll could reach 186,000” (July 12, 2024) and related commentary by Prof. Devi Sridhar. The Guardian+1
21. U.S. Office of the Historian — “The Suez Crisis, 1956” (Milestones series). Office of the Historian
22. U.S. Office of the Historian — “The Reagan Administration and Lebanon, 1981–1984.” Office of the Historian
23. INSS (Israel) — “The American–Israeli Dialogue at the Start of the First Lebanon War.” INSS
24. Arena — Richard Hil & Gideon Polya, “The Odious Politics of Counting Gaza’s Dead” (July 11, 2025). Arena
25. Éirígí — “Report: Death Toll in Gaza Reaches 680,000…” (Sept. 14, 2025). Éirígí For A New Republic

---

Disclaimer

This article draws on public reporting and institutional documentation cited above. War-time data are dynamic and contested; figures—especially excess/indirect mortality—are subject to revision as new evidence emerges. Dearborn Blog opposes violence against civilians and supports international humanitarian law and accountability. Publication does not imply endorsement of any government, party, or armed group. Readers should verify time-sensitive details with the linked sources.