An excellent balanced article by Sullivan. Kudos to Bari Weiss for letting him write this, even if it very much against her own beliefs. That's a level of maturity I really respect. Also not surprised by the number of people in the comments almost cheerfully happy at the deaths of so many Palestinian babies. Little different than the Hamas supporters handing out sweets after Oct 10.
Interesting how Andrew says how things could have been different if Israel had responded differently, using it's new Arab allies more. As if the world wasn't cheering the Hamas attack. Israel was alone then as they are alone now. Even the support from the US lasted until the electoral consequences of losing Michigan became more pronounced.
Maybe if the World united on 10/8 to condemn Hamas and demand the return of the hostages then Israel could have felt the space needed for a different response. But it turns out they are alone. And this is their chance to destroy Hamas. And their Gazan supporters.
Here's the thing: Hamas IS the government of Gaza. Hamas initiated the war with Israel. Hamas is Israel's target for retribution, and Hamas uses civilians as shields. It is time and past time to place ultimate blame for civilian casualties squarely on Hamas. And let's be honest here: if Hamas actually cared at all about the civilians they hide among, they would surrender and conclude this war that they cannot win. But they never will.
Now we know a gay Catholic conservative can be full of crap! In a part of the world when philosophical pining means much less than an eye for an eye, reality favors the latter. It is never acceptable when non-combatants are killed in war. Those deaths, in this instance, could all have been avoided. Hamas made the choice to attack, murder, rape, and kidnap! Clearly, the contrived mindset of "proportional response" has failed in this region. And, in reality, it was always destine to fail! Israel has a job to do--and Israel is doing it. BTW: Although I'm not sure if Mr. Sullivan meant to, but comparing the retaliation bombing of Gaza to excesses at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo are not equivalent at all. In both instances the command structure failed--and people were held accountable. In the current instance, Israel has warned where the war was going to be fought ahead of time, taken IDF casualties and deaths attempting to minimize civilian casualties--and in many instances provided free fire zones for the civilians to move. It is a false equivalence!
Hamas: Attacked Israel without provocation, murdered, raped, torture, and kidnapped. They then used the kidnapped Israelis and Gaza civilians as human shields--and continue to do that. Developed deep fortified tunnels to plan and use during their terror. Thus, requiring the 2000lb bombs to destroy them!
Israeli: Responded with superior force after being attacked. Warned Gazan civilians ahead of time where attacks were imminent, provided free fire zone of transit, and have taken unnecessary IDF casualties trying to minimize civilian casualties???
Sooner or later, all wars devolve into "good v. evil." The eye of the beholder decides. However, historically, no country has EVER worked to minimize civilian casualties as the IDF has done since October 7th! The excess civilian casualties are a result of choices made by Hamas! No philosophical, Ivy League double talk can turn this situation into anything except Israel is doing what they have to.
The wonderful Andrew Sullivan! I highly recommend the editors of Free Press to read the comments to this article to understand the strong bias of their audience and reflect on it.
I also thank you for posting this article. I confess i have been utterly disenchanted with the great promise of the FreePress. Posting this article goes some way to reminding me why I liked this publication.
I'm happy that Bari Weiss published this. The Free Press was supposed to allow for a variety of opinions. There is certainly a very strong bias towards Israel here - and we can see it in the readers. But heterodox people actually have quite a spectrum of views on the topic. For many, the far right in Israel and Hamas are both bad actors. Many of those people have been driven away from the Free Press - but such people are not small in number.
Hamas is free to surrender at any moment. What would you do if you had a terrorist army a couple of exits down the interstate seeking to kill you and your family morning, noon, and night? You would destroy them and then install enough forces to enact rule of law to the entire area.
Andrew Sullivan has put on full display his bigotry of low expectations. He expects nothing of Palestinian society and criticizes Israel for not performing enough miracles.
I've been an FP supporter since the beginning and look to the FP as a moral and ethical beacon of truth surrounded by narrative driven news. How many stories has the FP published that mainstream news ignored? How many pieces on mainstream news manipulating or violating journalistic standards? It breaks my heart that your standards don't hold up to Middle East coverage. This is the best you can do? I love Andrew Sullivan, but having him do a soft-ball opinion piece on the Middle East where he concludes that it's "ultimately all Hamas's fault" is the best you can do? Did I miss it? Did you cover the recent news that the NYT article on Hamas's use of sexual violence was actually authored by a IDF agent? (see intercept article). And despite the legitimate horrors committed by Hamas on 10/7 there was also a lot of propaganda that was mixed in (50 beheaded and baked babies anyone?) did you filter though it or just repeat it? I no longer trust CNN, NPR, NYT to follow journalistic standards and I really really want to continue to trust the FP but when I see selective coverage and no corrections to misinformation it makes it hard. I hope I'm wrong and just missed the corrections.
Bari Weiss did at least publish this - and to some degree, I believe Sullivan also held back a bit on his opinions on Netanyahu. The FP is great - with the one big blind spot being Israel. But Weiss at least acknowledged that bias - and actually allowed a very good piece here. Is it perfect? No. But it is something.
Although I have a vastly different take, I appreciated Andrew Sullivan's analysis. I thought he made reasonable arguments. Yet, there was some insulting assumptions he makes along the way.
The biggest thing he missed is captured by a single description: trigger-happy. I am both FIRMLY pro-Israel and I am devastated by the ongoing deaths of Gazan children. I am not a millitary strategist and cannot critique Israel's active fight for survival. But you do not have to know anything about modern warfare to recognize how Andrew blissfully and naively overlooks the collective Israeli suffering of being in this impossible situation and ignores the celebratory response we have seen the world over at the intended demise of a people and nation.
This kind of narrative normalizes the idea of an inevitable routine schedule for Jews to undergo genocide. Because when we fight back, we get called "trigger happy."
I have been reading Andrew for decades. He is an incredible writer and even when I disagree with him, as I do here, it is an enjoyable read.
This is the war Hamas chose and unless it is destroyed it will choose to do the same again and again. To say Israel should have “taken a breath, thought deeply and strategically, and acted deliberately” wrongly assumes Israel did not “take a breath” (it was weeks before ground forces entered Gaza), has not been thinking about how to deal with the terrorist state Hamas created in Gaza for almost two decades, and has not acted deliberately since Oct 7. The ratio of noncombatant to combatant casualties of 2.5 or so to 1 in Gaza is incredibly low for the type of urban warfare the IDF is engaged in and is a testament to how deliberate it has been.
Israel rightly sees Hamas as an existential threat and has no choice but to destroy it. As long as Hamas embeds itself in the civilian population civilians will suffer. All external pressure, from the US, EU, and especially the Arab state needs to exerted on Hamas to release the hostages and surrender not on Israel to accept the monster on its border.
First off, Mr Sullivan does make a valid point. People who are enraged and afraid can often find themselves doing things they later regret, as the United States did following 9/11. There have been incidents which have been and will still need to be investigated. Having said that, there are some very important pieces his analysis is missing.
First off is the critical point that provoking Israel is not the only way Hamas has put its citizens in danger in this conflict. They have, as has been their strategy for years, used Gazan civilians as human shields for their military equipment and personnel. Even when Israel takes steps that other countries would not to get Gazan civilians out of the line of fire, Hamas actively keeps them from leaving. (It's understandable why some would hear this and think it's Israeli propaganda meant to make themselves look like saints and their enemy look like devils, but it has been confirmed by military, intelligence, and journalistic sources around the world.)
Hamas wants those civilian casualties so they can cry foul to the rest of the world who will see pictures of dead babies and ask no more questions, simply start lambasting the obvious target in their understandable rage. As for why it doesn't matter to them, one of their leaders said it best in a relatively recent public broadcast. When speaking of why he believes Hamas can defeat Israel he said it was because Israel cares for life while they care for death (I freely admit I do not have access to the exact quote at the moment, and if someone believes I'm distorting the meaning please tell me).
At the end of the day what Mr. Sullivan and many others are not understanding is that Israel is fighting the kind of war which almost nobody in the west can remember fighting in living memory- an active war for survival. Hamas has not been shy about announcing that they will repeat the events of October 7th as often as they can. Thus Israel has a duty to its citizens to end Hamas. One of the main reasons Israel has as much support from me as it does is that I've heard soldiers speak in addition to the news reports of how Israel conducts itself in war. I firmly believe that if someone could present Israel with a better solution (that wouldn't have anyone with genuine military experience laughing them out of the room) to keep Gazan civilians safe while doing what they need to do, that person would become one of the Israeli military's greatest heroes.
Hamas should never have been able to do October 7 in the first place. Quite frankly, it was a mind boggling defense failure in Israel. Its not like the Hamas militants had tanks or airplanes or anything of that sort. Israel has ZERO real risk from Hamas, or the PLO. Where it does have risk if if the country loses support from the developed world, gets economically isolated, and eventually has it's quality of life degrade. That is a long term risk - and something that is starting to happen. The USA may elect Trump in 2024, but the USA demographics do not bode well for long term perpetual support for Israel. Things will likely be very different in the USA and most western countries in 2050. And Israel should understand that.
You’re right that October 7th never should have happened, but if anything that proves the rest of what you said false. Playing defense forever with an enemy that will never accept peace right on your border doesn’t work. And while you’re right about how important their public image is and how bad they’re doing on it. Any government that bases its defense policy on what their enemies can convince idiots to think is failing its people
Add Sullivan--for whom I have respect--to the list of terrorist apologists. Every horror he describes is 100% attributable to Hamas. Every Palestinian gruesomely injured and killed since October 7 would have been unharmed if Hamas had not spent years intentionally embedding its fighting materiel and personnel deep within the civilian population.
How many children is Israel willing to kill? As many as it takes to ensure Hamas is wiped from the earth. That's a terrifying and unfortunate reality that could stop today, literally TODAY, if Hamas surrendered and disarmed.
When analyzing this conflict I keep coming back to a thought experiment posed by Sam Harris: imagine a world where Israel could wave a magic wand and get everything it wants. You see a secure Israel, a peaceful Palestine. Now imagine if Hamas could wave the same wand. If you see anything other than millions of dead Jews and a Palestine that completely covers an eradicated Israel you are deluding yourself.
There's a reason we don't have to deal with nation-level Nazism or Japanese Imperialism any longer. It was eradicated through brutal, inhuman, terrifying force followed by deep compassion directed at reformed former enemies. I've come to the unfortunate conclusion that fundamentalist Jihadism needs to be handled the same way. The sooner non-Jihadist nations coalesce around the same conclusion the better.
An excellent balanced article by Sullivan. Kudos to Bari Weiss for letting him write this, even if it very much against her own beliefs. That's a level of maturity I really respect. Also not surprised by the number of people in the comments almost cheerfully happy at the deaths of so many Palestinian babies. Little different than the Hamas supporters handing out sweets after Oct 10.
Interesting how Andrew says how things could have been different if Israel had responded differently, using it's new Arab allies more. As if the world wasn't cheering the Hamas attack. Israel was alone then as they are alone now. Even the support from the US lasted until the electoral consequences of losing Michigan became more pronounced.
Maybe if the World united on 10/8 to condemn Hamas and demand the return of the hostages then Israel could have felt the space needed for a different response. But it turns out they are alone. And this is their chance to destroy Hamas. And their Gazan supporters.
Here's the thing: Hamas IS the government of Gaza. Hamas initiated the war with Israel. Hamas is Israel's target for retribution, and Hamas uses civilians as shields. It is time and past time to place ultimate blame for civilian casualties squarely on Hamas. And let's be honest here: if Hamas actually cared at all about the civilians they hide among, they would surrender and conclude this war that they cannot win. But they never will.
Now we know a gay Catholic conservative can be full of crap! In a part of the world when philosophical pining means much less than an eye for an eye, reality favors the latter. It is never acceptable when non-combatants are killed in war. Those deaths, in this instance, could all have been avoided. Hamas made the choice to attack, murder, rape, and kidnap! Clearly, the contrived mindset of "proportional response" has failed in this region. And, in reality, it was always destine to fail! Israel has a job to do--and Israel is doing it. BTW: Although I'm not sure if Mr. Sullivan meant to, but comparing the retaliation bombing of Gaza to excesses at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo are not equivalent at all. In both instances the command structure failed--and people were held accountable. In the current instance, Israel has warned where the war was going to be fought ahead of time, taken IDF casualties and deaths attempting to minimize civilian casualties--and in many instances provided free fire zones for the civilians to move. It is a false equivalence!
Hamas: Attacked Israel without provocation, murdered, raped, torture, and kidnapped. They then used the kidnapped Israelis and Gaza civilians as human shields--and continue to do that. Developed deep fortified tunnels to plan and use during their terror. Thus, requiring the 2000lb bombs to destroy them!
Israeli: Responded with superior force after being attacked. Warned Gazan civilians ahead of time where attacks were imminent, provided free fire zone of transit, and have taken unnecessary IDF casualties trying to minimize civilian casualties???
Sooner or later, all wars devolve into "good v. evil." The eye of the beholder decides. However, historically, no country has EVER worked to minimize civilian casualties as the IDF has done since October 7th! The excess civilian casualties are a result of choices made by Hamas! No philosophical, Ivy League double talk can turn this situation into anything except Israel is doing what they have to.
The wonderful Andrew Sullivan! I highly recommend the editors of Free Press to read the comments to this article to understand the strong bias of their audience and reflect on it.
I also thank you for posting this article. I confess i have been utterly disenchanted with the great promise of the FreePress. Posting this article goes some way to reminding me why I liked this publication.
I'm happy that Bari Weiss published this. The Free Press was supposed to allow for a variety of opinions. There is certainly a very strong bias towards Israel here - and we can see it in the readers. But heterodox people actually have quite a spectrum of views on the topic. For many, the far right in Israel and Hamas are both bad actors. Many of those people have been driven away from the Free Press - but such people are not small in number.
Hamas is free to surrender at any moment. What would you do if you had a terrorist army a couple of exits down the interstate seeking to kill you and your family morning, noon, and night? You would destroy them and then install enough forces to enact rule of law to the entire area.
The question is how many are Hamas willing to sacrifice? Does Hamas even see it as a sacrifice? They just get to paradise ahead of schedule.
Andrew Sullivan has put on full display his bigotry of low expectations. He expects nothing of Palestinian society and criticizes Israel for not performing enough miracles.
I've been an FP supporter since the beginning and look to the FP as a moral and ethical beacon of truth surrounded by narrative driven news. How many stories has the FP published that mainstream news ignored? How many pieces on mainstream news manipulating or violating journalistic standards? It breaks my heart that your standards don't hold up to Middle East coverage. This is the best you can do? I love Andrew Sullivan, but having him do a soft-ball opinion piece on the Middle East where he concludes that it's "ultimately all Hamas's fault" is the best you can do? Did I miss it? Did you cover the recent news that the NYT article on Hamas's use of sexual violence was actually authored by a IDF agent? (see intercept article). And despite the legitimate horrors committed by Hamas on 10/7 there was also a lot of propaganda that was mixed in (50 beheaded and baked babies anyone?) did you filter though it or just repeat it? I no longer trust CNN, NPR, NYT to follow journalistic standards and I really really want to continue to trust the FP but when I see selective coverage and no corrections to misinformation it makes it hard. I hope I'm wrong and just missed the corrections.
Bari Weiss did at least publish this - and to some degree, I believe Sullivan also held back a bit on his opinions on Netanyahu. The FP is great - with the one big blind spot being Israel. But Weiss at least acknowledged that bias - and actually allowed a very good piece here. Is it perfect? No. But it is something.
Although I have a vastly different take, I appreciated Andrew Sullivan's analysis. I thought he made reasonable arguments. Yet, there was some insulting assumptions he makes along the way.
The biggest thing he missed is captured by a single description: trigger-happy. I am both FIRMLY pro-Israel and I am devastated by the ongoing deaths of Gazan children. I am not a millitary strategist and cannot critique Israel's active fight for survival. But you do not have to know anything about modern warfare to recognize how Andrew blissfully and naively overlooks the collective Israeli suffering of being in this impossible situation and ignores the celebratory response we have seen the world over at the intended demise of a people and nation.
This kind of narrative normalizes the idea of an inevitable routine schedule for Jews to undergo genocide. Because when we fight back, we get called "trigger happy."
Same to you Kelly. Thanks for the civil debate.
Thank you for publishing Andrew's thoughtful piece. I agree with his viewpoint and am happy to see it expressed here in The Free Press!
The Jihadis don’t care if you kill all their children, but really want to kill all of yours (and you).
I have been reading Andrew for decades. He is an incredible writer and even when I disagree with him, as I do here, it is an enjoyable read.
This is the war Hamas chose and unless it is destroyed it will choose to do the same again and again. To say Israel should have “taken a breath, thought deeply and strategically, and acted deliberately” wrongly assumes Israel did not “take a breath” (it was weeks before ground forces entered Gaza), has not been thinking about how to deal with the terrorist state Hamas created in Gaza for almost two decades, and has not acted deliberately since Oct 7. The ratio of noncombatant to combatant casualties of 2.5 or so to 1 in Gaza is incredibly low for the type of urban warfare the IDF is engaged in and is a testament to how deliberate it has been.
Israel rightly sees Hamas as an existential threat and has no choice but to destroy it. As long as Hamas embeds itself in the civilian population civilians will suffer. All external pressure, from the US, EU, and especially the Arab state needs to exerted on Hamas to release the hostages and surrender not on Israel to accept the monster on its border.
First off, Mr Sullivan does make a valid point. People who are enraged and afraid can often find themselves doing things they later regret, as the United States did following 9/11. There have been incidents which have been and will still need to be investigated. Having said that, there are some very important pieces his analysis is missing.
First off is the critical point that provoking Israel is not the only way Hamas has put its citizens in danger in this conflict. They have, as has been their strategy for years, used Gazan civilians as human shields for their military equipment and personnel. Even when Israel takes steps that other countries would not to get Gazan civilians out of the line of fire, Hamas actively keeps them from leaving. (It's understandable why some would hear this and think it's Israeli propaganda meant to make themselves look like saints and their enemy look like devils, but it has been confirmed by military, intelligence, and journalistic sources around the world.)
Hamas wants those civilian casualties so they can cry foul to the rest of the world who will see pictures of dead babies and ask no more questions, simply start lambasting the obvious target in their understandable rage. As for why it doesn't matter to them, one of their leaders said it best in a relatively recent public broadcast. When speaking of why he believes Hamas can defeat Israel he said it was because Israel cares for life while they care for death (I freely admit I do not have access to the exact quote at the moment, and if someone believes I'm distorting the meaning please tell me).
At the end of the day what Mr. Sullivan and many others are not understanding is that Israel is fighting the kind of war which almost nobody in the west can remember fighting in living memory- an active war for survival. Hamas has not been shy about announcing that they will repeat the events of October 7th as often as they can. Thus Israel has a duty to its citizens to end Hamas. One of the main reasons Israel has as much support from me as it does is that I've heard soldiers speak in addition to the news reports of how Israel conducts itself in war. I firmly believe that if someone could present Israel with a better solution (that wouldn't have anyone with genuine military experience laughing them out of the room) to keep Gazan civilians safe while doing what they need to do, that person would become one of the Israeli military's greatest heroes.
Hamas should never have been able to do October 7 in the first place. Quite frankly, it was a mind boggling defense failure in Israel. Its not like the Hamas militants had tanks or airplanes or anything of that sort. Israel has ZERO real risk from Hamas, or the PLO. Where it does have risk if if the country loses support from the developed world, gets economically isolated, and eventually has it's quality of life degrade. That is a long term risk - and something that is starting to happen. The USA may elect Trump in 2024, but the USA demographics do not bode well for long term perpetual support for Israel. Things will likely be very different in the USA and most western countries in 2050. And Israel should understand that.
You’re right that October 7th never should have happened, but if anything that proves the rest of what you said false. Playing defense forever with an enemy that will never accept peace right on your border doesn’t work. And while you’re right about how important their public image is and how bad they’re doing on it. Any government that bases its defense policy on what their enemies can convince idiots to think is failing its people
Add Sullivan--for whom I have respect--to the list of terrorist apologists. Every horror he describes is 100% attributable to Hamas. Every Palestinian gruesomely injured and killed since October 7 would have been unharmed if Hamas had not spent years intentionally embedding its fighting materiel and personnel deep within the civilian population.
How many children is Israel willing to kill? As many as it takes to ensure Hamas is wiped from the earth. That's a terrifying and unfortunate reality that could stop today, literally TODAY, if Hamas surrendered and disarmed.
When analyzing this conflict I keep coming back to a thought experiment posed by Sam Harris: imagine a world where Israel could wave a magic wand and get everything it wants. You see a secure Israel, a peaceful Palestine. Now imagine if Hamas could wave the same wand. If you see anything other than millions of dead Jews and a Palestine that completely covers an eradicated Israel you are deluding yourself.
There's a reason we don't have to deal with nation-level Nazism or Japanese Imperialism any longer. It was eradicated through brutal, inhuman, terrifying force followed by deep compassion directed at reformed former enemies. I've come to the unfortunate conclusion that fundamentalist Jihadism needs to be handled the same way. The sooner non-Jihadist nations coalesce around the same conclusion the better.