Somebody musta wanteda bomb!

[sabotabby]

So, do we get to do Mutually Assured Destruction* again? 'Cause that was fun.



HUM BOM!
Allen Ginsberg

I

Whom bomb?
We bomb'd them!
Whom bomb?
We bomb'd them!
Whom bomb?
We bomb'd them!
Whom bomb?
We bomb'd them!

Whom bomb?
We bomb you!
Whom bomb?
We bomb you!
Whom bomb?
You bomb you!
Whom bomb?
You bomb you!

What do we do?
Who do we bomb?
What do we do?
Who do we bomb?
What do we do?
Who do we bomb?
What do we do?
Who do we bomb?

What do we do?
You bomb! You bomb them!
What do we do?
You bomb! You bomb them!
What do we do?
We bomb! We bomb you!
What do we do?
You bomb! You bomb you!

Whom bomb?
We bomb you!
Whom bomb?
We bomb you!
Whom bomb? You bomb you!
Whom bomb?
You bomb you!


May 1971


II


For Don Cherry

Whydja bomb?
We didn't wanna bomb!
Whydja bomb?
We didn't wanna bomb!
Whydja bomb?
You didn't wanna bomb!
Whydja bomb?
You didn't wanna bomb!

Who said bomb?
Who said we hadda bomb?
Who said bomb?
Who said we hadda bomb?
Who said bomb?
Who said you hadda bomb?
Who said bomb?
Who said you hadda bomb?

Who wantsa bomb?
We don't wanna bomb!
Who wantsa bomb?
We don't wanna bomb!
Who wantsa bomb?
We don't wanna bomb!
We don't wanna
we don't wanna
we don't wanna bomb!

Who wanteda bomb?
Somebody musta wanteda bomb!
Who wanteda bomb?
Somebody musta wanteda bomb!
Who wanteda bomb?
Somebody musta wanteda bomb!
Who wanteda bomb?
Somebody musta wanteda bomb!

They wanteda bomb!
They neededa bomb!
They wanteda bomb!
They neededa bomb!
They wanteda bomb!
They neededa bomb!
They wanteda bomb!
They neededa bomb!

They thought they hadda bomb!
They thought they hadda bomb!
They thought they hadda bomb!
They thought they hadda bomb!

Saddam said he hadda bomb!
Bush said he better bomb!
Saddam said he hadda bomb!
Bush said he better bomb!
Saddam said he hadda bomb!
Bush said he better bomb!
Saddam said he hadda bomb!
Bush said he better bomb!

Whatdid he say he better bomb for?
Whatdid he say he better bomb for?
Whatdid he say he better bomb for?
Whatdid he say he better bomb for?

Hadda get ridda Saddam with a bomb!
Hadda get ridda Saddam with a bomb!
Hadda get ridda Saddam with a bomb!
Hadda get ridda Saddam with a bomb!

Saddam's still there building a bomb!
Saddam's still there building a bomb!
Saddam's still there building a bomb!
Saddam's still there building a bomb!



III

Armageddon did the job
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Armageddon did the job
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog

Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Armageddon does the job
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Armageddon does the job

Armageddon for the mob
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Armageddon for the mob
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog

Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Gog Magog Gog Magog
Gog & Magog Gog & Magog
Gog Magog Gog Magog

Gog Magog Gog Magog
Gog Magog Gog Magog
Gog Magog Gog Magog
Gog Magog Gog Magog

Ginsberg says Gog & Magog
Armageddon did the job.


February - June 1991





From Cosmopolitan Greetings: Poems 1986-1992
© Copyright 1994 by Allen Ginsberg (HarperCollins Publishers, 1994)

* No, seriously, what is everyone so upset about? The Soviets never killed anyone with their bomb, and neither has North Korea. The Americans, though—that's a whole 'nother story.

Comments

[dobrovolets.livejournal.com]

No, seriously, what is everyone so upset about?

Because Kim Jong Il is an evil, inscrutable Asian, and a dang dirty commie to boot!

/sarcasm

[frippy.livejournal.com]

Exactly. The Russians were commies, too, but you know, Russians are psychologically different and they're all too busy mainlining vodka and being cold and erasing people from photographs to set off bombs.

North Koreans, though, they're definitely Asian. They're good at math and whatnot. Fear them! But not as much as we must fear the Mooslimofascists.

[sabotabby]

I thought they was working together in the Axis of Eeeevil.

[frippy.livejournal.com]

North Korea is the weak, wussy member of the Axis of Oh noez. It's like Italy in the original axis -- lots of crazy posturing from an eccentric leader and stuff, but we kicked their asses easily.

I mean, most of the country is malnourished. We could smack them up easily. USA! USA! USA!

[gabski.livejournal.com]

hahhaa... whenever north korea was mentioned in the news it was called "the communist country of north korea" ... npr this morning reported that south koreans are more concerned with US reaction than the north having nukes.

it bugs me that many people are saying that kim jong feels he needs nukes to deter the US from going in and messing with him and his country. it bugs me because i believe it. ugh. UGH! my country, my country!!! where are you???

[sabotabby]

Gah! They are not really that communist. But yeah, if I were Kim Jong Il I'd be a bit worried too.

[frippy.livejournal.com]

North Korea:communism::New Iraqi government:democracy

[gabski.livejournal.com]

HAHAH! china = ok trading partners.

[thelittlebudgie.livejournal.com]

"No, seriously, what is everyone so upset about? The Soviets never killed anyone with their bomb, and neither has North Korea. The Americans, though—that's a whole 'nother story."

Can't say that hasn't occured to me. Kind of makes you wonder...

Would the book you got these from still happen to be in print? It sounds pretty good.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

Probably

[sabotabby]

Also, I'm in Canada, and the U.S. and its bombs are a lot closer from where I'm sitting. ;)

I'm pretty sure that Cosmopolitan Greetings is still in print. I saw Ginsberg perform "Hum Bom!" right before he died.

[thelittlebudgie.livejournal.com]

Yes, being Canadian does help with that. Although I don't think my parents were even aware of the Red Threat, since every time I tell them something from my Cold War course they look baffled.

[frippy.livejournal.com]

I think they collected all of Ginsberg's poetry into two heavy volumes. My boyfriend has the one of them.

[frippy.livejournal.com]

Finally, shitty action films will have a new enemy. Muslim terrorists were getting old.

[sabotabby]

This means we have to put up with bad "Asian" accents, though. I'm not sure if that's better or worse than the assumption that white movie-goers can't tell the difference between Arabs and Indians.

Hans Brix

[frippy.livejournal.com]

This means we have to put up with bad "Asian" accents, though.

We already do. :(

There's an Indian restaurant in Saint Louis that's owned and operated by Sikhs. I remember eating there and being taken aback by the little American flags taped in every window, the stars and stripe bunting hanging from the ceiling, and the extra page in the menu with bad MS Word clip-art proclaiming that House of India loves America. When it occurred to me why the restaurant owner felt compelled to put on such a patriotic display, I ironically felt far less patriotic.

lol white people :(

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm so over that Osama thing.

[frippy.livejournal.com]

So is the Bush administration! *rimshot*

[culpster.livejournal.com]

I think Ginsberg may have pulled a George Lucas on episode II & III up there...didn't know he was an intimate of Don Cherry! He's dead.

What-else-is-new was my initial response too, and an appropriate response to the idiot media it is. HOWEVER, proliferation is bad, bad, bad, whether they're friends of friends of friends or enemies of enemies of friends of enemies or whatev.

I think outrage and anxiety is appropriate, if we save a nice big chunk for our side, and I don't have to touch the idiot media to guess whether THAT message is getting through...

Meanwhile, Ontario is proposing to meet its Kyoto commitments by reverting to nukes, if anyone hasn't noticed...what a wonderful world...

by reverting to nukes

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

What do you think of James Lovelock's position regarding nukes? I am strangely attracted to it.

Re: by reverting to nukes

[(Anonymous)]

I haven't had the pleasure. Name-dropper! ;)

Re: by reverting to nukes

[culpster.livejournal.com]

OK now I have. Two words: RADIOACTIVE and WASTE.

Re: by reverting to nukes

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

Lt. Worf: "Captain! We are detecting pot-to-kettle communication on one of the subspace channels. It seems to be an encrypted signal that is continuously looped."
Capt. Picard: "Lieutenant, intercept communication, decrypt it and put it through."
Lt. Worf: "Aye sir."
intercepted signal: "black-black-black-black-black..."

[sabotabby]

The first time I heard that poem, I was unaware that there were two Don Cherries, and I got very confused.

Meanwhile, Ontario is proposing to meet its Kyoto commitments by reverting to nukes, if anyone hasn't noticed...what a wonderful world...

*eyeroll*

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, THAT Don Cherry! Oh, THAT Bush! Now I get it.

[bike4fish.livejournal.com]

The reference is to the hockey Don Cherry. Or hokey Don Cherry. Same thing.

[funnel101.livejournal.com]

I'm upset because I don't believe *any* country should have a nuclear weapon, and because I don't trust Bush to handle this situation well at all.

[gabski.livejournal.com]

i second that... especially the Bush part. ever notice the completely obnoxious tone in his voice when he says, "diplomatic efforts take time. i know it's frustrating but this is what diplomacy calls for" or some crap like that. argh! i just want to rip his head off and stick it up his ass when he says sh*t like that.

[sabotabby]

Oh, I agree completely. But I think Kim Jong Il is less likely to wreck havoc with it, given the consequences.

[(Anonymous)]

And about the 'he crazy' stuff. This test was apparently a protest against the S Korean guy taking over at the UN. So it's not like he's got a nervous twitch, it was a politically calculated action. No scarier than us - UNLESS you believe the world is happier with US power unchecked (of course, the enemy of my enemy is not exactly my best pal in this instance)

[(Anonymous)]

by the way - about that 'anonymous' shit? It's me, Culpster! Sorry, I'm new at this.

[sabotabby]

No worries. By the way, I know you IRL, don't I?

[culpster.livejournal.com]

I think so. I haven't quite put an ID to the ID yet... :)

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

The anonymous stuff means that you've probably logged out or that your browser is acting funny with cookies.

[nom-de-grr.livejournal.com]

Chalmers Johnson contended in "Sorrows of Empire" that MAD was a far more sane strategy than the whackiness we're engaged in now.

[sabotabby]

I've read convincing arguments to that effect. I suppose it's sane most of the time*, unless it happens to destroy the entire world several times over.

* Not including proxy wars and unexpected radioactive accidents.

[eyelidlessness.livejournal.com]

It's impossible to know who the Soviets killed with their bomb. But I imagine one could trace increased deaths from radiation-related illnesses. That is, if that information were available. Which I sincerely doubt.

I'm not "upset" any more about North Korea's "atomic weapon" (come on... 4% the strength of the bombs the US used in World War II? I sincerely doubt it was an atomic weapon. Just more posturing...) than about any others. But they're all bad.

Besides that, Mutually Assured Destruction is not an effective strategy, and since the end of World War III that has become more and more clear with previously censored information and previously gagged military and diplomatic officials coming out and showing just how close nuclear war was on the horizon the whole time. I'm not a fan of US "policy" towards nuclear proliferation, obviously, but I am positive that proliferation makes nuclear war more and more likely... and in the meantime, the stockpiles are poisoning the planet.

Furthermore, Iran's strategy of nuclear weapons development as a deterrent (and North Korea's in kind, if they are developing an atomic bomb) is extremely misguided. Rome The US' increasing arrogance seems to be leaning towards suicidal territory these days, and anuclear first strike is actually being seriously discussed as a strategy for dealing with Iran (or North Korea). This is not going to become less likely as Iran (or North Korea) moves closer to having a working nuclear arsenal. Especially because both these countries are more likely to target a regional enemy than the US.

[sabotabby]

Oh, if we're counting unintentional deaths, that's a different story. It's vital information, of course, especially since the First World's strategy for dealing with peak oil seems to be "more nuclear power yay!" but difficult or impossible to determine.

I just see the current nuclear standoff as basically absurd. On the one hand, you've got a known psychopath who has already killed a bunch of people running around with a machine gun. And people freak out because a dude who's been charged with assault a few times procures a pistol. Obviously, we don't have either guy to be armed, but it doesn't much change the balance of power.

[eyelidlessness.livejournal.com]

Oh, if we're counting unintentional deaths, that's a different story.

They may not have been deliberate, in the sense of "I want those people dead", but they were certainly intentional. The effects of radiation poisoning have been known for a long time.

I just see the current nuclear standoff as basically absurd.

I do too. But the absurdity is what scares me. The US' desperation has gone so far that we're likely to see nuclear war with small potatoes "rogue states" whereas two decades ago it took a global superpower to bring us this close to the brink. I shudder to think of what will happen when China starts to flex, or when the EU becomes more independent.

On the one hand, you've got a known psychopath who has already killed a bunch of people running around with a machine gun. And people freak out because a dude who's been charged with assault a few times procures a pistol. Obviously, we don't have either guy to be armed, but it doesn't much change the balance of power.

I understand what you're saying, but I try not to let anti-imperialist doctrine cloud my thinking. Kim is every bit the psychopath that Bush is, and probably has a lot less influence to keep him from doing something really stupid (like confronting the most powerful state in human history, for instance).

Not only do I not want North Korea to have nuclear weapons for their own sake, and for ours, I don't want them to have nuclear weapons for fear of the US' response. Both states are far too unpredictable, and both are increasingly desperate.

[sabotabby]

Oh, which is why I compared Kim to a guy with assault charges. He's perfectly capable, and even likely, to kill someone. He just can't do as much damage, while the anti-nuke movement with regard to the U.S. seems to be non-existent these days.

[esizzle.livejournal.com]

Happy mutually assured destrcution Day! I think now Japan and South Korea should break the proliferation treaty and get themselves some nukes too. Then soon enough everyone can have nuclear weapons. Cause if two wrongs make a right.. 10000 wrongs should make some quite righteous results!

[sabotabby]

Thanks for the image of a Japanese nuclear project. Now I have this picture of cute little pink A-Bombs with (three) large eyes painted on. And possibly tentacles.

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Can you say Hello Kitty A-bombs?

[esizzle.livejournal.com]

lol!
not possibly.. definately tentacles.

[smhwpf.livejournal.com]

What worries me about it is what the US might do, especially in the present state of things where the North Koreans have a few bombs, but possibly not very good ones, and with uncertain delivery mechanisms. Possibly enough to do some very serious damage to a couple of US cities, certainly not enough to destroy the US. There is no MAD. So the US, especially with Bush and the like, might start thinking that this is the last window of opportunity to do something about it before the DPRK do have enough deliverable weapons to make it utterly out of the question, especially if they think there's a possibility Kim might just be crazy enough to use them except as an ultimate deterrent. Probably won't happen. The US, even the Neo-cons, will probably decide that the possibility that North Korea might be able to create a mushroom cloud over Seattle is sufficient deterrent to an attack. But this phase, where they have some nuclear weapons but not enough to be an unambiguous deterrent, is the most dangerous. (Not that MAD is safe; but less dangerous than the current scenario IMO.)

[sabotabby]

Does North Korea have any oil, though? ;)