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

[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.