The deaths of innocents — especially children — during wartime always strikes at the souls of normal people. But there has never been a war devoid of such tragedies. And the Hamas-Israeli war is no different.

Yet there are those who point the finger at Israel for causing the bombing deaths of children in Gaza, while calling for ceasefire and condemning Israel for civilian deaths.

One of those is The Free Press writer Andrew Sullivan, who asked: How Many Children Is Israel Willing To Kill?

“Andrew Sullivan” by Geoff Livingston is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.

Sullivan qualifies his eyebrow-raising question, however. “No, this is not genocide, as I have argued before.” And yes, “Israel has every right to self-defense,” he maintains:

…the terror sect has no interest in a cease-fire; and any attempt to disarm and destroy Hamas in Gaza would be bound to harm civilians in terrible ways.

Sullivan goes on, acknowledging that yes, Hamas wants to exterminate Israelis; they use civilians as fodder to maximize civilian deaths; and civilian loss is inevitable in order to defeat the terror group. He sums up his faux concerns with this: Hamas bears ultimate responsibility for the carnage. 

But still, he writes:

Hundreds of massive, indiscriminate bombs in such a tiny, crammed place all but guarantee mass death of innocents. It is simply too easy to put all the blame on Hamas for this.

Because, according to Sullivan, “Israelis have … lost their minds a little.” Will they lose their souls as well? he wondered. Israel, he asserted, should’ve “taken a breath” and sat down with more friendly Arabs to decide what to do, after the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

Think of the long-term goals the Israelis could have achieved if they had taken a breath, thought deeply and strategically, and acted deliberately, in consort with their recently acquired Arab interlocutors.

Andrew Sullivan is living in a dream world.

Responding to Sullivan About Civilian Deaths

One of the readers of Sullivan’s article castigated him in a lengthy, fact-filled response. It reads, in part:

Israel asks people to move to safe areas, Hamas prevents this. Israel has a map of safe areas for people to go to. UNRWA and other aid UN agencies, actually send people into the unsafe zones to schools, mosques, and hospitals where they become human shields for the Hamas terror infrastructure. Yes, UNRWA and other aide agencies in Gaza are Hamas.

Israel opens civilian corridors so people can escape the fighting and Hamas shoots at those fleeing and plants IEDs to kill their own people. How is this Israel’s fault? …

Andrew never writes what Israel should have done in the aftermath of Oct 7. Just give up the ship and leave? Go where? Sue for peace? With who? Those who commit such barbaric acts and vow to commit genocide against every Jew in the world? Maya Angelou once said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.” We believe Hamas wholeheartedly…

If Hamas valued the lives of Palestinian children they would never have begun this war. Put the blame where it should be. But Andrew isn’t brave enough for that.

Perhaps it’s because deep down, Andrew Sullivan hates Israel.

Andrew Sullivan Hates Israel

Writer Harold Brackman exposed Andrew Sullivan’s contempt for Israel in a new article for the Brandeis Center, a think tank:

He quoted one of Sullivan’s anti-Israel rants:

… nihilist and futile war crime is all that Hamas has really got left. Yes, they conceal armaments and rockets and weapons in civilian areas – and that undoubtedly increases civilian deaths. But what alternative do they have exactly, if they wish to have any military capacity at all? Should they build clearly demarcated camps and barracks and munitions stores, where the IDF could just destroy them at will?

Brackman responded:

Translated: We should even-handedly admit that Hitler invaded Poland because it was the most convenient country for him to attack in 1939 when the Poles also called for “generalized revenge” against Germans … What other choice did Hitler have?

Why has Andrew Sullivan turned so virulently against Israel?

Anyone who has followed Sullivan over many years knows he is a brilliant writer, but has also jumped ideologies in a bewildering manner. For a while he was the “house conservative” at New Republic. He supported Bob Dole for President in 1996 and George W. Bush in 2000, while also holding pro-Israel views.

But Sullivan had a sea change in 2004, supporting John Kerry and trashing America as a “torture nation.” In 2008 he supported Barack Obama — claiming that Obama was a “closet conservative” — and launched into attacks on what he called “Christianist” right-wing extremists who opposed Sullivan’s true grail: gay marriage. At the same time he dove into hatred of Israel for its so-called “right-wing extremism,” calling for NATO or US troops to enter Palestinian areas to protect them from such alleged fanaticism. Sullivan also trashed conservative Jews as “neocons,” even ridiculing former NY Rep. Eric Cantor’s large (i.e., “Jewish”) nose.

Brackman concludes that Andrew Sullivan has become “a virulent enemy of Israel with anti-Semitic tendencies.”

The deaths of innocent Gazans, especially the children, give one pause. No child should endure what they have over the past 100 days. But Andrew Sullivan should take to heart the hollow yet truthful words he penned in his article: Hamas bears ultimate responsibility for the carnage. And there is no “but still” about it.

Featured image: “Children, Gaza” by Marius Arnesen is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. Cropped.