US author lauds suicide bombers

[Kazak]

David Nason, New York correspondent
November 19, 2005

ONE of the greatest living US writers has praised terrorists as "very brave people" and used drug culture slang to describe the "amazing high" suicide bombers must feel before blowing themselves up.

Kurt Vonnegut, author of the 1969 anti-war classic Slaughterhouse Five, made the provocative remarks during an interview in New York for his new book, Man Without a Country, a collection of writings critical of US President George W. Bush.

Vonnegut, 83, has been a strong opponent of Mr Bush and the US-led war in Iraq, but until now has stopped short of defending terrorism.

I absolutley love KV, but this is going to be hard to get behind. Comments, DU?

[Teaser]

1. I don't care.

He's old, he's cranky, he says things a lot.

[htuttle]

2. Well, I don't see that he is 'defending terrorism'

The very idea of killing oneself for a political or religious goal is very foreign to the Western mind, fighting in wars notwithstanding (since even in a war voluntarily participated in, you intend NOT to die). For any writer of the human experience, this has to be a fascinating concept to explore.

Vonnegut is not saying he 'agrees' with them, he's just talking about what he finds interesing about them. Is he required to add, "...but they are evil" after every sentence? Well, he's Vonnegut, and he's unlikely to be that transparent. :shrug:


on edit:
What publication is this from, btw? There's no link, and it uses extremely loaded language, such as 'using drug culture slang', etc... Seems very right wing, even while exploring what's bound to be an inflammatory topic.

[indepat]

3. Brave maybe, but all terrorist acts are hideous, be the terrorist wearing

a white or black hat, whatever their cause.

[unpossibles]

5. true. BUT

we need to keep in mind that terrorism and other forms of guerrilla warfare, are the only options people feel they have. Hell, in some ways we were terrorists to the British King in the late 1700's because we had no way of fighting them their way.

I am not condoning or defending the acts of 9/11, but we have to look at the context and consequences of our historic decisions. Why did they attack us?

The answer is there, and seems pretty obvious - and it's not because they hate freedom.

Frankly, I wish we (as a nation) would discuss why these things happen, so as to avoid them. Concentrating on "evil" and "good vs. bad" is counter productive and not working (I am not trying to start something, indepat, just bringing up a point).

And yes, the acts are hideous.

[bemildred]

4. This story was posted and discussed here a few weeks back.

You should supply a link if you want to go through it again.
Personally, if I have to choose between Kurt and the guy who "interviewed" him, I'll pick Kurt.

[brmdp3123]

6. I heard KV say something very similar to this

on Imus a couple of weeks ago. I think the guy took a few too many tokes and dropped couple extra hits. He's old, he's rich-he doesn't give a shit. Great books, though.

[xchrom]

7. that is a complete and purposeful misreading of

what vonnegut is talking about.

he's talking about resolve, will power.

the kind of will power that will fuel this insurgency long after we've run out of billions to throw at it.

we will leave iraq -- mostly in ruins -- because we can't understand -- the raw feelings the insurgency has.

they will never run out of the energy it takes to strap bombs on themselves and kill us as long as we are there.

we will run out of money.

cause that, that is all we've got

[newscott]

8. Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner.

[bemildred]

9. Oh oh oh, you terrorist justifier, you.

:applause:

[Ian David]

10. He's very old. n/t