Just about everybody leads with the Mideast war, but only the Wall Street Journal and New York Times focus on what seems like the most significant development: President Bush basically declared that Israel should go on bombing Lebanon and trying to pummel Hezbollah for now. "What we recognize is that the root cause of the problem is Hezbollah," said the president. "Sometimes it requires tragic situations to help bring clarity in the international community." USA Todayfronts the war but leads with a New Orleans' doctor and two nurses arrested on murder charges and accused of giving four suffering patients lethal doses of drugs as their hospital was flooded and isolated after Katrina.

Secretary of State Rice is expected to head to the Mideast within the next week. But instead of pushing for a ceasefire, says the Journal, "her mission will be to build support for the effective crippling of Hezbollah."

The NYT's headline is opaque and beats around the bush (if you will): "U.S. SEEN WAITING TO ACT ON ISRAELI AIRSTRIKES IN LEBANON." Seen as waiting to act?

The Washington Post has no such squishiness: "BUSH SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S MOVE AGAINST HEZBOLLAH." Except that headline is on A10.

About 30 people were reported killed in Israeli strikes including a few when planes hit a convoy carrying medical supplies near the Syrian border. (Question: Does Israel consider all trucks crossing the border to be fair game?) The Post reports from the scene and says a few cars were hit too, including a labeled taxi of the kind that normally plies the border. Eleven Lebanese soldiers were killed in another strike. (Israel has been calling on Lebanon's weak army to move against Hezbollah and it's not clear why the army has occasionally been attacked.)

Hezbollah launched about 100 rockets yesterday, including a few that hit Haifa. One person was killed and one critically wounded.

The Post notes inside that "some U.S. and European military and intelligence officials were puzzled by Israel's strategy" and viewed the goals as "unrealistic or too ambitious." The Los Angeles Timesflags a new poll showing nearly 90 percent of Israelis support the offensive.

The LAT's poll mention comes via the paper's lead story, which is an oddly credulous and myopic piece that details Israel's strategy without adding outside perspectives or context.

In fairness, the LAT's lead story is balanced by another front-page dispatch that details the emerging humanitarian crisis in southern Lebanon. The paper acknowledges things are so chaotic "it's almost impossible know" exactly what's going on. But one government minister said,"There's no food, and the logistics are very difficult to send them food. We're having problems with the malnutrition of babies." Among the latest targets struck have been a food processing plant and a milk factory. 

Plenty of shelters have sprung up in Beirut and elsewhere, says the LAT: "Many of the facilities are being run by Hezbollah."