Edwin Starr — War
Album: Best of...Avg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 2307
Length: 3:18
Plays (last 30 days): 0
share
tweet
War, huh, yeah
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, uh-huh, uh-huh
War, huh, yeah
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again, y'all
War, huh, good god
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
Oh war, I despise
'Cause it means destruction of innocent lives
War means tears to thousands of mothers' eyes
When their sons go off to fight and lose their lives
I said, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again
War, huh, whoa-oh-whoa-oh, Lord
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreak
War, friend only to the undertaker
Oh, war, is an enemy to all mankind
The thought of war blows my mind
War has caused unrest within the younger generation
Induction then destruction, who wants to die?
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it, say it, say it
War, huh, uh-huh, yeah, uh
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreaker
War, it got one friend, that's the undertaker
Oh, war has shattered many a young man's dreams
Made him disabled, bitter and mean
Life is much too short and precious to spend fighting wars these days
War can't give life, it can only take it away
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again
War, huh, whoa-oh-whoa-oh, Lord
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreaker
War, friend only to the undertaker
Peace, love and understanding, tell me
Is there no place for them today?
They say we must fight to keep our freedom
But lord knows there's got to be a better way
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
You tell me, (nothing) say it, say it, say it, say it
War, huh, good god, yeah, huh
What is it good for?
Stand up and shout it (nothing)
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, uh-huh, uh-huh
War, huh, yeah
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again, y'all
War, huh, good god
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
Oh war, I despise
'Cause it means destruction of innocent lives
War means tears to thousands of mothers' eyes
When their sons go off to fight and lose their lives
I said, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again
War, huh, whoa-oh-whoa-oh, Lord
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreak
War, friend only to the undertaker
Oh, war, is an enemy to all mankind
The thought of war blows my mind
War has caused unrest within the younger generation
Induction then destruction, who wants to die?
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it, say it, say it
War, huh, uh-huh, yeah, uh
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreaker
War, it got one friend, that's the undertaker
Oh, war has shattered many a young man's dreams
Made him disabled, bitter and mean
Life is much too short and precious to spend fighting wars these days
War can't give life, it can only take it away
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, say it again
War, huh, whoa-oh-whoa-oh, Lord
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing, listen to me
War, it ain't nothing but a heartbreaker
War, friend only to the undertaker
Peace, love and understanding, tell me
Is there no place for them today?
They say we must fight to keep our freedom
But lord knows there's got to be a better way
Oh, war, huh, good god, y'all
What is it good for?
You tell me, (nothing) say it, say it, say it, say it
War, huh, good god, yeah, huh
What is it good for?
Stand up and shout it (nothing)
Comments (382)add comment
joejennings wrote:
GREAT TUNE!! RP has only ONE TUNE by him on the PLAYLIST! PLEASE ADD MORE TUNES! Thank You!
dtl wrote:
He actually wanted that to be the title, but his mistress didn't like it, so she made him change the name to "War and Peace."
Tolstoy should have used this title ;-)
He actually wanted that to be the title, but his mistress didn't like it, so she made him change the name to "War and Peace."
En mis oídos el estribillo suena
Oh, war "Qué coño"
Oh, war "Qué coño"
easmann wrote:
Where in the song does he express that nuance? The lyrics are quite unqualified and absolute with regards to war in general.
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate response to aggression. It was a very specific, and yes, quite visceral, reaction to the Vietnam War
Where in the song does he express that nuance? The lyrics are quite unqualified and absolute with regards to war in general.
Godlike. Straight 10.
Glory to Ukraine, Usa, Uk 🇺🇦🤝🇬🇧🇺🇲
Fuck russia 🇷🇺=💩💩💩
Fuck russia 🇷🇺=💩💩💩
Tolstoy should have used this title ;-)
GREAT TUNE!! RP has only ONE TUNE by him on the PLAYLIST! PLEASE ADD MORE TUNES! Thank You!
Can I dedicate this to Vladimir Putin?
On_The_Beach wrote:
Uh, perhaps consider stopping 8 years of shelling of Donbas.
Uh, perhaps consider stopping 8 years of shelling of Donbas.
On_The_Beach wrote:
Stop Nuland!
https://img.thedailybeast.com/...
https://www.salon.com/2021/01/...
Stop Nuland!
https://img.thedailybeast.com/...
https://www.salon.com/2021/01/...
Great call, Bill and Rebecca. I really liked the cover by Springsteen as well
Hmm, apparently a couple RP listeners are fans of Putin and/or War. V easmann wrote:
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate response to aggression. It was a very specific, and yes, quite visceral, reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
You still might not like the song or agree with its message but the context in this case is critical to understanding why this song exists and is so adamant.
True then, true now.
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate response to aggression. It was a very specific, and yes, quite visceral, reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
You still might not like the song or agree with its message but the context in this case is critical to understanding why this song exists and is so adamant.
True then, true now.
Bill knocking it out of the park with some good energy while I try to get late night work done at 3:01 am.
Randomax wrote:
When this song was first released, my younger brother thought this was a song about a girl named "War" and he further thought the lyrics were saying, "War, huh! What is she good for? Absolutely nothing!"
on the lighter side: my 20 something son the other day......I was asking about whatever we were talking about "what is it good for?" and he broke into song "Absolutely Nothing"....I laughed so hard and was amazed at 25 he even knew the lyrics to that 1969 song....it LIVES ON!!
When this song was first released, my younger brother thought this was a song about a girl named "War" and he further thought the lyrics were saying, "War, huh! What is she good for? Absolutely nothing!"
hellsgardener wrote:
Never ending.
Particularly relevant - and scary - now in mid March 2022
Never ending.
Topical! You listening Vlad?
Particularly relevant - and scary - now in mid March 2022
there's a reason they call it the dogs of war. Deep down there is some primal force within us apes that is barely contained by the veneer of civilisation we try to uphold. It gets even worse when supposedly neutral strategists concoct supposedly objective arguments for an attack that contain some irresistible logic for the decision makers. But what goes through the rulers' heads as they finally put their finger on the start button is in no ways rational but driven by hormones they can't control.
Edwin, tell that to the Jewish people in and around Germany in the 1930's.
“GOOD GOD Y’ALL!”
absolutely love this man’s voice
floydoftherocks wrote:
At least one brilliant song and a strong statement that is still relevant today and will be for eternity, I am afraid.
But what was Edwin Starr good for?
At least one brilliant song and a strong statement that is still relevant today and will be for eternity, I am afraid.
Yeah!
I'm so glad I'm alone in my office right now! Cranking it up and chair dancing :)
I can't help thinking about that Seinfeld episode where they discuss alternative titles for War and Peace :)
Thanks for playing it!
I'm so glad I'm alone in my office right now! Cranking it up and chair dancing :)
I can't help thinking about that Seinfeld episode where they discuss alternative titles for War and Peace :)
Thanks for playing it!
I did the work to be reformed... so I agree !
Anyway, my nepohew serve in mountain infantery, and I thanks him to fight for my rights...
Just for reflexion
Anyway, my nepohew serve in mountain infantery, and I thanks him to fight for my rights...
Just for reflexion
Listen to me !! scrubbrush wrote:
Good God y'all!
stegokitty wrote:
Saving lives is not the same as "giving" life. BTW.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Saving lives is not the same as "giving" life. BTW.
bitbanger wrote:
Nah Trump is just trying to incite a Civil War right at home, and still doing it after his failed insurrection.
Interesting. You might want to add Clintons (2x), Obamas, Bidens, Schiffs, Schumers, Feinsteins, Kerrys, and plenty of others to your list of arch villains.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
kingart wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
kingart wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Nah Trump is just trying to incite a Civil War right at home, and still doing it after his failed insurrection.
bitbanger wrote:
Mr. Trump has done absolutely NUTHIN to stop any war, anywhere.
Perhaps you should occasionally take off your own heavily partisan glasses, brother.
Interesting. You might want to add Clintons (2x), Obamas, Bidens, Schiffs, Schumers, Feinsteins, Kerrys, and plenty of others to your list of arch villains.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
Mr. Trump has done absolutely NUTHIN to stop any war, anywhere.
Perhaps you should occasionally take off your own heavily partisan glasses, brother.
h8rhater wrote:
You seem amazingly ignorant about Communist countries & how they work. Freedom is what the Vietnamese lost, not won.
Stegokitty cries about oversimplicity and then fetes us with a gross oversimplification on a level far above the one in Edwin Starrs marvelous Vietnam protest. A shining example of a haughty and warped perspective. The kind that starts wars. Very much like the one that started the Vietnam War.
Although, the Vietnamese did suffer for years at the hands of a PN before finally winning the freedom that they still have 50 years on. So there is that.
Although, the Vietnamese did suffer for years at the hands of a PN before finally winning the freedom that they still have 50 years on. So there is that.
You seem amazingly ignorant about Communist countries & how they work. Freedom is what the Vietnamese lost, not won.
easmann wrote:
Stegokitty cries about oversimplicity and then fetes us with a gross oversimplification on a level far above the one in Edwin Starrs marvelous Vietnam protest. A shining example of a haughty and warped perspective. The kind that starts wars. Very much like the one that started the Vietnam War.
Although, the Vietnamese did suffer for years at the hands of a PN before finally winning the freedom that they still have 50 years on. So there is that.
stegokitty wrote:
wgsu_1978 wrote:
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate reaction to aggression. It was a very specific reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
wgsu_1978 wrote:
Sounds like you're expecting a little too much from Top 40 pop music from 1969. I think the effect of "War" was supposed to be visceral, not logical.
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate reaction to aggression. It was a very specific reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
Stegokitty cries about oversimplicity and then fetes us with a gross oversimplification on a level far above the one in Edwin Starrs marvelous Vietnam protest. A shining example of a haughty and warped perspective. The kind that starts wars. Very much like the one that started the Vietnam War.
Although, the Vietnamese did suffer for years at the hands of a PN before finally winning the freedom that they still have 50 years on. So there is that.
stegokitty wrote:
wgsu_1978 wrote:
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate response to aggression. It was a very specific, and yes, quite visceral, reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
You still might not like the song or agree with its message but the context in this case is critical to understanding why this song exists and is so adamant.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
wgsu_1978 wrote:
Sounds like you're expecting a little too much from Top 40 pop music from 1969. I think the effect of "War" was supposed to be visceral, not logical.
stegokitty posits a theoretical justification of war that might apply to WWII. But that's not the context from which this protest song was born. It is not a song about whether war is ever a legitimate response to aggression. It was a very specific, and yes, quite visceral, reaction to the Vietnam War which by all reasonable accounts was in fact good for absolutely nothin' except death and destruction (More than 3 million people [including over 58,000 Americans] were killed in the Vietnam War, and more than half of the dead were Vietnamese civilians). I don't think it's correct to evaluate this song outside of that context.
You still might not like the song or agree with its message but the context in this case is critical to understanding why this song exists and is so adamant.
Interesting. You might want to add Clintons (2x), Obamas, Bidens, Schiffs, Schumers, Feinsteins, Kerrys, and plenty of others to your list of arch villains.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
kingart wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Although it hard to see through heavily partisan glasses, it appears that the most evil President Trump is attempting to end these interminable wars. Of course, so many who opposed these military engagements hate him for it.
Go figure.
kingart wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
on the lighter side: my 20 something son the other day......I was asking about whatever we were talking about "what is it good for?" and he broke into song "Absolutely Nothing"....I laughed so hard and was amazed at 25 he even knew the lyrics to that 1969 song....it LIVES ON!!
kingart wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Hilarious and sad at the same time.
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Hilarious and sad at the same time.
GeorgeMWoods wrote:
I know what you mean....and while I'm OK with the music, I find the delivery of these tremendously simple lyrics to be a perfect fit for the "why the fuck do we go to war, ever?!?!" theme. This is a 10 for me because of that message. Long Live RP!!
Not really my kinda music, but oh, the message!!
I know what you mean....and while I'm OK with the music, I find the delivery of these tremendously simple lyrics to be a perfect fit for the "why the fuck do we go to war, ever?!?!" theme. This is a 10 for me because of that message. Long Live RP!!
Stefen wrote:
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Because civilians were being drafted into the military, the Vietnam war fostered a massive anti-war movement in the USA. The draft has now been replaced by an all volunteer military force with the consequence that there is no longer a viable peace movement. Welcome to the world of perpetual warfare.
More importantly, because there is no draft, few sons and daughters of the ruling class ever have to worry about being inducted into the services, much less serving in a combat zone. Let the working classes do it. This is another, profound and perhaps the pre-eminent reason why there is perpetual war. The Trumps, Pences, Bushes, Dimons, Murdochs and Ryans of the world would most likely be far less inclined to advocate a war if there was a good chance their own children would be called. Fortunate sons, indeed.
Furthermore, it's my view that these people so legislate against reproductive rights and abortion because that is a key factor for maintaining the stocks of personnel, peons and cannon fodder so that their progeny aren't called upon to fight and/or aren't conspicuous in their conscientious objection or absence. Patriotism and the Bible aren't all that to them when it comes to family and money.
Fifteen seconds into this Simpson's Treehouse of Horror VIII. Back when they were funny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__w_0HKS4us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__w_0HKS4us
Stefen wrote:
And we thought we’d won when we got rid of the draft. Oh, how wrong we were.
Because civilians were being drafted into the military, the Vietnam war fostered a massive anti-war movement in the USA. The draft has now been replaced by an all volunteer military force with the consequence that there is no longer a viable peace movement. Welcome to the world of perpetual warfare.
And we thought we’d won when we got rid of the draft. Oh, how wrong we were.
Not really my kinda music, but oh, the message!!
VH1 wrote:
Keith Richards and a few cockroaches will repopulate the world.
Shame that no one has learned anything since the time this song was released! There are even more wars in the world than then!
But hopefully one day human kind has destroyed itself totally, then Nature will rebuild itself without making the same mistake twice!
But hopefully one day human kind has destroyed itself totally, then Nature will rebuild itself without making the same mistake twice!
Keith Richards and a few cockroaches will repopulate the world.
Because civilians were being drafted into the military, the Vietnam war fostered a massive anti-war movement in the USA. The draft has now been replaced by an all volunteer military force with the consequence that there is no longer a viable peace movement. Welcome to the world of perpetual warfare.
Jota wrote:
Some corporations yes. Not all corporations.
The notion that War is good for business dates from WW II when the USA fought WW II in foreign theatres. War destroys productive assets and always risks blow back.
These days, US support for the Israeli ethnic cleansing program blows back to US civilians in the form of the Sept. 11th attacks and all the mass hysterical hyper-vigilant policy blow back since then.
To all my Democratic friends who support Israel's occupation and settlements, congratulations for Da'esh and President Trump. They are your babies.
Well done!
War, what is it good for....American corporations.
Some corporations yes. Not all corporations.
The notion that War is good for business dates from WW II when the USA fought WW II in foreign theatres. War destroys productive assets and always risks blow back.
These days, US support for the Israeli ethnic cleansing program blows back to US civilians in the form of the Sept. 11th attacks and all the mass hysterical hyper-vigilant policy blow back since then.
To all my Democratic friends who support Israel's occupation and settlements, congratulations for Da'esh and President Trump. They are your babies.
Well done!
It definitely is a very strange concept.
War, what is it good for....American corporations.
GOOD GAWD, Y'ALL!!! 10+
reminds of the carnage of young lives wasted on the bullshit of the Vietnam conflict! SHAME ON THE GOVERNMENT
Shame that no one has learned anything since the time this song was released! There are even more wars in the world than then!
But hopefully one day human kind has destroyed itself totally, then Nature will rebuild itself whithout making the same mistake twice!
But hopefully one day human kind has destroyed itself totally, then Nature will rebuild itself whithout making the same mistake twice!
Iconic.
BillG just said: "A bit more direct than what you hear from artists these days if you hear anything at all."
Ain't that the truth!
BillG just said: "A bit more direct than what you hear from artists these days if you hear anything at all."
Ain't that the truth!
Guess you had to be there. 10
"...Although one wonders if War and Peace would have been as highly acclaimed as it was if it was published under its original name, War—What Is It Good For?"
ottoerago wrote:
I'd rate that higher.
Initially thought this was Tom Jones doing a cover of Frankie Goes To Hollywood - oops.
I'd rate that higher.
kingart wrote:
Yes they were to blame indeed, they did it...but then alternative historians get into the weeds of the collusions of Standard Oil of NJ (which became Esso), IBM, Ford and other AMERICAN corporations, not to mention the Brits, the Swiss and others, selling or sharing technology, licenses, and loans, to tacitly or secretly underwrite the Nazi regime. Ford and the assembly line...IBM and punch cards...technology for obtaining oil and diesel fuel from coal. Etc. Hey, good business opportunities, let's kick a few dollars to this Hitler fellow. Hitler and Ford admired each other. Proven fact.
First, the U.S. and the Brits screwed and squeezed the German economy after WWI. Shorted them big time. Then they sought to profit on the rebound. Where have we seen that before? Not to mention that ol' Adolf hates the Russians and Stalin, and what a coincidence, so did all the Western powers. Do you think it's as simple as "the Germans are to blame"?
'Alternative historians' are to history what 'alternative medicine' is to medicine - at best pernicious nonsense.
Yes they were to blame indeed, they did it...but then alternative historians get into the weeds of the collusions of Standard Oil of NJ (which became Esso), IBM, Ford and other AMERICAN corporations, not to mention the Brits, the Swiss and others, selling or sharing technology, licenses, and loans, to tacitly or secretly underwrite the Nazi regime. Ford and the assembly line...IBM and punch cards...technology for obtaining oil and diesel fuel from coal. Etc. Hey, good business opportunities, let's kick a few dollars to this Hitler fellow. Hitler and Ford admired each other. Proven fact.
First, the U.S. and the Brits screwed and squeezed the German economy after WWI. Shorted them big time. Then they sought to profit on the rebound. Where have we seen that before? Not to mention that ol' Adolf hates the Russians and Stalin, and what a coincidence, so did all the Western powers. Do you think it's as simple as "the Germans are to blame"?
'Alternative historians' are to history what 'alternative medicine' is to medicine - at best pernicious nonsense.
Initially thought this was Tom Jones doing a cover of Frankie Goes To Hollywood - oops.
CamAM wrote:
Whoa. Who knew Germany wasn't to blame for the second world war? Thank you for the inspirational anti-American rant...
Yes they were to blame indeed, they did it...but then alternative historians get into the weeds of the collusions of Standard Oil of NJ (which became Esso), IBM, Ford and other AMERICAN corporations, not to mention the Brits, the Swiss and others, selling or sharing technology, licenses, and loans, to tacitly or secretly underwrite the Nazi regime. Ford and the assembly line...IBM and punch cards...technology for obtaining oil and diesel fuel from coal. Etc. Hey, good business opportunities, let's kick a few dollars to this Hitler fellow. Hitler and Ford admired each other. Proven fact.
First, the U.S. and the Brits screwed and squeezed the German economy after WWI. Shorted them big time. Then they sought to profit on the rebound. Where have we seen that before? Not to mention that ol' Adolf hates the Russians and Stalin, and what a coincidence, so did all the Western powers. Do you think it's as simple as "the Germans are to blame"?
Whoa. Who knew Germany wasn't to blame for the second world war? Thank you for the inspirational anti-American rant...
Yes they were to blame indeed, they did it...but then alternative historians get into the weeds of the collusions of Standard Oil of NJ (which became Esso), IBM, Ford and other AMERICAN corporations, not to mention the Brits, the Swiss and others, selling or sharing technology, licenses, and loans, to tacitly or secretly underwrite the Nazi regime. Ford and the assembly line...IBM and punch cards...technology for obtaining oil and diesel fuel from coal. Etc. Hey, good business opportunities, let's kick a few dollars to this Hitler fellow. Hitler and Ford admired each other. Proven fact.
First, the U.S. and the Brits screwed and squeezed the German economy after WWI. Shorted them big time. Then they sought to profit on the rebound. Where have we seen that before? Not to mention that ol' Adolf hates the Russians and Stalin, and what a coincidence, so did all the Western powers. Do you think it's as simple as "the Germans are to blame"?
But what was Edwin Starr good for?
Spot on, and most excellent!
And to whoever said it was overly emotional, get back to us when it's your turn to be the cannon fodder!
And to whoever said it was overly emotional, get back to us when it's your turn to be the cannon fodder!
It's OK to like a song because of its political statement.
It's OK to like a song in spite of its political statement.
It's OK to not like a song because of its political statement.
It's OK to just not like a song.
It's OK. It's OK. It's OK. It's OK. It's OK.
I like this song.
It's OK to like a song in spite of its political statement.
It's OK to not like a song because of its political statement.
It's OK to just not like a song.
It's OK. It's OK. It's OK. It's OK. It's OK.
I like this song.
oldsaxon wrote:
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Whoa. Who knew Germany wasn't to blame for the second world war? Thank you for the inspirational anti-American rant...
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Whoa. Who knew Germany wasn't to blame for the second world war? Thank you for the inspirational anti-American rant...
stegokitty wrote:
Sounds like you're expecting a little too much from Top 40 pop music from 1969. I think the effect of "War" was supposed to be visceral, not logical.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Sounds like you're expecting a little too much from Top 40 pop music from 1969. I think the effect of "War" was supposed to be visceral, not logical.
oldsaxon wrote:
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Thoughtful response, nicely done.
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Thoughtful response, nicely done.
They say we must fight to keep our freedom - or we could just nuke 'em and be done with it i s'pose....
.
"Imagine there's no country
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one"
Wonder where John would be in the midst of all this hate, if some dumb-arse hadn't gone & shot him.
.
"Imagine there's no country
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one"
Wonder where John would be in the midst of all this hate, if some dumb-arse hadn't gone & shot him.
WAY ahead of the pack and unique for its time. Would be a stand out hit today. Kongos owes......big time.
stegokitty wrote:
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
You really don't get to decide which philosophy is the right one. You can only choose the right one for you. Deciding that one is wrong says a lot about you and not a lot about the ideals of nations. Deciding that one nation is wrong can, and has proved to be, right occasionally, but really, history is written by the winners, how often has America been the winner? Truthfully? Vietnam? South America? Middle East? How often has the US ideology actually succeeded outside of the western capitalist world? If you can't beat it down then well bank it down...I mean crikey, you ran away from Vietnam with your tails between your legs. Now you trade with them...You still blame a completely reformed Germany for the second world war and yet beg to get a bit of the action in the EU they have recovered. Your government wants to make it illegal for other governments to regulate industry. How fascists is that? Are you proud of that?
Imperialist wanking.
Overly simplistic, emotion-based tripe, and the music is annoying too.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
Lines like "war cannot give life, it can only take it away" beg the question.
Here's the scenario:
Psychopathic Nation (PN) rises up to destroy everyone who doesn't bow to it's insane, abusive worldview and lifestyle.
Nations who do not wish to submit to such a monstrous nation go to war against PN.
Lives are saved from the destruction that PN would've wreaked, not to mention the years of suffering that would ensue should PN succeed.
Just one shining example of the goofy philosophy behind this song.
as always to the naysayers and general haters out there 8.1 out of over a thousand ratings hmmm appears majority does rule on some things 
CoYoT51 wrote:
Don't YOU blame USA for wars, Stingray!!!
You can try that but (as much as I hate to agree with him) he's really got a point. There could be a bit more of the spirit of this song in America these days instead of all the cowering under the bedsheets that's been happening over there lately.
Don't YOU blame USA for wars, Stingray!!!
You can try that but (as much as I hate to agree with him) he's really got a point. There could be a bit more of the spirit of this song in America these days instead of all the cowering under the bedsheets that's been happening over there lately.
GOOD GAWD Y'ALL
Stingray wrote:
Don't YOU blame USA for wars, Stingray!!!
LISTEN UP, AMERICA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WAR!!!!!
What it's good for,....America??
TELL US!!!!!
PS
Maybe some apologetic song Syrian song, next...? Or Iraqian? Iranian? Panamanian? Chilenian? Afganian? Pakistani?
Don't YOU blame USA for wars, Stingray!!!
If we don't go to war, how else can we achieve hegemony over the Kingdom of Pandora?
One of my childhood favs thanks Bill :)
Poacher wrote:
Ha ha! I think you actually believe you have a democratic system in the USA! Hilarious.
(oh, and for clarity. . . we don't have democracy in the UK either)
Ha ha! I think you actually believe you have a democratic system in the USA! Hilarious.
(oh, and for clarity. . . we don't have democracy in the UK either)
In the liberal, progressive, conservative, and independent press in the US and Europe, what I am about to say hardly needs stating. Everyone understands this. But here we have a few extremely vocal commenters that struggle to understand the blatant contradiction in fomenting revolutionary rhetoric while at the same time espousing anti-war dogmas. It is good to hate war, I hate it too. I hate the fact the US has troops stationed abroad, they should all come home. But even the most cursory understanding of the last 200 years should instruct anyone that many horrible wars were fought mainly over socialism and extreme leftist ideologies. These were wars in which tens upon tens of millions of people were murdered and tortured. And for what? There is not in existence today one single socialist country that the Occupy Wall Street protesters would claim allegiance with. In fact, OWS member, when on camera, would always disassociate themselves from socialism. Socialism is now so stigmatized here that even the extremists in the US run from it. If you want the US to be more socially just, as I do (I also want Europe to be more socially just as well, BTW, and it is much less so than the US), then we should be discussing things like a minimum wage hike, an estate tax increase, jobs training, etc.. Do you think it would be better to have a socialist revolutionary war in which millions upon millions die instead of working things out in a peaceful democratic process? What is the matter with you? Is life in the US and UK so bad that millions need to die in war to "improve" it? What makes you think a war would improve anything when it never has in the past?
Poacher, you personally advocate revolution, you have written it here on other pages. That is advocating war. You are a liar and a hypocrite. Or, you are just trolling, and lowering the level of conversation here so it becomes a game of tit for tat taunting. You are not a serious person, and I suspect you are not a very bright one. You do have some interesting things to say about music though, and since this is not a political comment board, we can brush this off as a joke (since apparently this is how you see it in any case).
However, maybe we can start taking these things a little more seriously.
The UK is a monarchy, that is a fact. You cannot say this is an equal and fair minded mud-slinging at our respective countries when you say the US is not a democracy. I have stated the truth, while you are spreading anti-American bigotry.
Completely concur with the sentiment of the song. It's sad that humanity can't seem to abandon this most horrible manifestation of hatred, pride, and despair - and/or whatever other justifications are employed.
Having said that, this song is just overplayed in general.
Having said that, this song is just overplayed in general.
rdo wrote:
Ha ha! I think you actually believe you have a democratic system in the USA! Hilarious.
(oh, and for clarity. . . we don't have democracy in the UK either)
Dear Leader,
Thank you for the Trotsky, Chomsky, Kim Jong Il perspective. Seig Heil!
--The Unwashed Masses
Thank you for the Trotsky, Chomsky, Kim Jong Il perspective. Seig Heil!
--The Unwashed Masses
Ha ha! I think you actually believe you have a democratic system in the USA! Hilarious.
(oh, and for clarity. . . we don't have democracy in the UK either)
fredriley wrote:
ROFL! "Battling the Cuban-backed Sandinistas, the Contras were, according to Reagan, "the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers."" (Source: PBS). Reagan also concurred with Thatcher's view that the ANC were "terrorists". "Democracy" doesn't come into it, and never does for major States: all that matters is power and wealth. Realpolitik. "Democracy" is just window-dressing, legitimacy for State terrorism.
Dear Leader,
Thank you for the Trotsky, Chomsky, Kim Jong Il perspective. Seig Heil!
--The Unwashed Masses
ROFL! "Battling the Cuban-backed Sandinistas, the Contras were, according to Reagan, "the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers."" (Source: PBS). Reagan also concurred with Thatcher's view that the ANC were "terrorists". "Democracy" doesn't come into it, and never does for major States: all that matters is power and wealth. Realpolitik. "Democracy" is just window-dressing, legitimacy for State terrorism.
Dear Leader,
Thank you for the Trotsky, Chomsky, Kim Jong Il perspective. Seig Heil!
--The Unwashed Masses
What war is good for - America?
Tell us non-Americans - huuuugh!
rdo wrote:
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
ROFL! "Battling the Cuban-backed Sandinistas, the Contras were, according to Reagan, "the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers."" (Source: PBS). Reagan also concurred with Thatcher's view that the ANC were "terrorists". "Democracy" doesn't come into it, and never does for major States: all that matters is power and wealth. Realpolitik. "Democracy" is just window-dressing, legitimacy for State terrorism.
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
ROFL! "Battling the Cuban-backed Sandinistas, the Contras were, according to Reagan, "the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers."" (Source: PBS). Reagan also concurred with Thatcher's view that the ANC were "terrorists". "Democracy" doesn't come into it, and never does for major States: all that matters is power and wealth. Realpolitik. "Democracy" is just window-dressing, legitimacy for State terrorism.
Daddy Warbucks had another opinion. Looks like we may have to have another "police action" to revive the economy...check out world history.
Tom Jones?
LISTEN UP, AMERICA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WAR!!!!!
What it's good for,....America??
TELL US!!!!!
PS
Maybe some apologetic song Syrian song, next...? Or Iraqian? Iranian? Panamanian? Chilenian? Afganian? Pakistani?
hell of a cut..........time for some Gil Scot Heron.....
......time for some Gil Scot Heron.....Thank you UncleHud!
super 10 for Mr Starr
super 10 for Mr Starr
"War. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing."
Amen, brother.
unclehud
US Navy Submarine Service, 1976-1982
Amen, brother.
unclehud
US Navy Submarine Service, 1976-1982
JHZ wrote:
The 9/11 terrorists were not fighting for oppressed people. You make a valid point, however it is really just changing the subject. If you are a citizen granted full democratic rights, and your goal is to spread terror and kill people in order to promote your world view, then you are a terrorist and most definitely not a freedom fighter.
mandolin wrote:
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...rdo wrote:
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
I don't see a contradiction in terms. Demos = the people, cratos = power/rule , so rule by the people. Even if you simply discuss its meaning today, rule based on the people as sovereign, this is not the same as freedom for everyone.
Don't get me wrong, I personally believe that a good basis for making a personal distinction between the two is the question of who they are fighting and whether the fighter is oppressed. It tends to be less likely that oppression on a large and serious scale occurs against a group of people in a democracy. However, it is first of all not a given and secondly, the affected group might still think differently, so what mandolin says to a degree would still apply. Two examples I can think of: the Palestinian fight agains Israel. Israel is a democracy, it does oppress Palestinians. I personally do not think Palestinian fighters should be considered freedom fighters because I don't believe that violence is the best way to achieve political goals. But I can definitely see why you could consider them freedom fighters. Another example, could be the Black Panther movement. There definitely was oppression there. Did they have other means besides violence? I definitely think so, but then again I was not the one oppressed.
So I guess its a value questions more than one based on a clear cut distinction. What irks me a bit about your comment here is that in other comments you suggest that you can spread peace by going to war. The suggestion seems to be that democracy can do that and go in and fight for the freedom of others. So every democrat fighting for freedom is a freedom fighter as long as he/she does not fight another democracy or what? What if two democracies fight each other?
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
I don't see a contradiction in terms. Demos = the people, cratos = power/rule , so rule by the people. Even if you simply discuss its meaning today, rule based on the people as sovereign, this is not the same as freedom for everyone.
Don't get me wrong, I personally believe that a good basis for making a personal distinction between the two is the question of who they are fighting and whether the fighter is oppressed. It tends to be less likely that oppression on a large and serious scale occurs against a group of people in a democracy. However, it is first of all not a given and secondly, the affected group might still think differently, so what mandolin says to a degree would still apply. Two examples I can think of: the Palestinian fight agains Israel. Israel is a democracy, it does oppress Palestinians. I personally do not think Palestinian fighters should be considered freedom fighters because I don't believe that violence is the best way to achieve political goals. But I can definitely see why you could consider them freedom fighters. Another example, could be the Black Panther movement. There definitely was oppression there. Did they have other means besides violence? I definitely think so, but then again I was not the one oppressed.
So I guess its a value questions more than one based on a clear cut distinction. What irks me a bit about your comment here is that in other comments you suggest that you can spread peace by going to war. The suggestion seems to be that democracy can do that and go in and fight for the freedom of others. So every democrat fighting for freedom is a freedom fighter as long as he/she does not fight another democracy or what? What if two democracies fight each other?
The 9/11 terrorists were not fighting for oppressed people. You make a valid point, however it is really just changing the subject. If you are a citizen granted full democratic rights, and your goal is to spread terror and kill people in order to promote your world view, then you are a terrorist and most definitely not a freedom fighter.
fantastic classic... love it...
Say it again "Good God,y'all" Favorite on the iPhone especially in rush hour before another day at the office.
Late September 1985, my girlfriend and I with another couple leave work early to beat the traffic to the LA Coliseum to catch the first of the last four shows of Springsteen's Born in the USA tour. We get there WAY early. Sitting on the grass outside eating KFC and drinking beer we hear the band playing around during their soundcheck. They launch into the distinctive opening riffs of War. No vocals as I recall, just the band playing it loud. "Wow, I remember that song, haven't heard that in forever."
Bruce and the band played it for real that night for the first time in front of a live audience. It brought the house down.
Bruce and the band played it for real that night for the first time in front of a live audience. It brought the house down.
A great song of social conscience. And that voice...wham. Off da meter.
As much as I believe music can be transformative, and Starr lays it all out in very simple terms with this song, we Americans just keep on keeping on with death and destruction. We are arguably the most violent nation on Earth and seem hopelessly stuck in our love affair with guns and violence.
When will calmer, more level heads prevail? Maybe not in time to save this experiment in democracy.
When will calmer, more level heads prevail? Maybe not in time to save this experiment in democracy.
Funk and politics! \m/
I wish this song will one day really be heard. Intellectually nearly everybody agrees. But in fact, as we still remain belligerent in our hearts, war has still a bright future ahead of us.
Politicians cann't do anything to stop that.
Politicians cann't do anything to stop that.
I think Dali said it best —->
= Face of war
= Face of war
norvell wrote:
Say it again
Good God, y'all!
Say it again
Good God, y'all!
Everybody in my church be dancing... love it...
Whenever I hear this song it reminds me of how easily Americans are bamboozled by our government. Obama is certainly better than McCain or Romney, but he's still essentially an establishment president who mostly supports the status quo when it comes to war and pushing our weight around the world. The Military Industrial Complex that Eisenhower warned us about still runs our foreign policy, and that's going to help accelerate the end to this little experiment in democracy.
d-don wrote:
Say it again
Good God, y'all...
Say it again
mandolin wrote:
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...rdo wrote:
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
I don't see a contradiction in terms. Demos = the people, cratos = power/rule , so rule by the people. Even if you simply discuss its meaning today, rule based on the people as sovereign, this is not the same as freedom for everyone.
Don't get me wrong, I personally believe that a good basis for making a personal distinction between the two is the question of who they are fighting and whether the fighter is oppressed. It tends to be less likely that oppression on a large and serious scale occurs against a group of people in a democracy. However, it is first of all not a given and secondly, the affected group might still think differently, so what mandolin says to a degree would still apply. Two examples I can think of: the Palestinian fight agains Israel. Israel is a democracy, it does oppress Palestinians. I personally do not think Palestinian fighters should be considered freedom fighters because I don't believe that violence is the best way to achieve political goals. But I can definitely see why you could consider them freedom fighters. Another example, could be the Black Panther movement. There definitely was oppression there. Did they have other means besides violence? I definitely think so, but then again I was not the one oppressed.
So I guess its a value questions more than one based on a clear cut distinction. What irks me a bit about your comment here is that in other comments you suggest that you can spread peace by going to war. The suggestion seems to be that democracy can do that and go in and fight for the freedom of others. So every democrat fighting for freedom is a freedom fighter as long as he/she does not fight another democracy or what? What if two democracies fight each other?
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
I don't see a contradiction in terms. Demos = the people, cratos = power/rule , so rule by the people. Even if you simply discuss its meaning today, rule based on the people as sovereign, this is not the same as freedom for everyone.
Don't get me wrong, I personally believe that a good basis for making a personal distinction between the two is the question of who they are fighting and whether the fighter is oppressed. It tends to be less likely that oppression on a large and serious scale occurs against a group of people in a democracy. However, it is first of all not a given and secondly, the affected group might still think differently, so what mandolin says to a degree would still apply. Two examples I can think of: the Palestinian fight agains Israel. Israel is a democracy, it does oppress Palestinians. I personally do not think Palestinian fighters should be considered freedom fighters because I don't believe that violence is the best way to achieve political goals. But I can definitely see why you could consider them freedom fighters. Another example, could be the Black Panther movement. There definitely was oppression there. Did they have other means besides violence? I definitely think so, but then again I was not the one oppressed.
So I guess its a value questions more than one based on a clear cut distinction. What irks me a bit about your comment here is that in other comments you suggest that you can spread peace by going to war. The suggestion seems to be that democracy can do that and go in and fight for the freedom of others. So every democrat fighting for freedom is a freedom fighter as long as he/she does not fight another democracy or what? What if two democracies fight each other?
CLASSIC
Good God, y'all...
bobzane wrote:
.."Absolutely..."..
what is it good for
.."Absolutely..."..
Remember this was released in 1969. A great year for music and another fine example
Even (our) professional warriors know that you've failed if you have to go to War. Something our Civilian Leadership oft-times fails to understand.
So it goes. (Great song regardless)
Highlow
American Net'Zen
So it goes. (Great song regardless)
Highlow
American Net'Zen
Compared to What into War....I cant write left handed MUST be next!
Balthazar wrote:
War doesn't spread democracy and never did. Spreading democracy with the means of war is pure propaganda. It's Orwellian newspeak, war is peace. For somebody living in europe, you sound like archetypal american who thinks that enslaving countries around the world and robbing them of their resources is spreading democracy. Well, looks like by spreading democracy around the world, US lost every bit of what was left of democracy and became a totalitarian superpower.
You know very well that this is not true.
War doesn't spread democracy and never did. Spreading democracy with the means of war is pure propaganda. It's Orwellian newspeak, war is peace. For somebody living in europe, you sound like archetypal american who thinks that enslaving countries around the world and robbing them of their resources is spreading democracy. Well, looks like by spreading democracy around the world, US lost every bit of what was left of democracy and became a totalitarian superpower.
You know very well that this is not true.
what is it good for
rdo wrote:
War doesn't spread democracy and never did. Spreading democracy with the means of war is pure propaganda. It's Orwellian newspeak, war is peace. For somebody living in europe, you sound like archetypal american who thinks that enslaving countries around the world and robbing them of their resources is spreading democracy. Well, looks like by spreading democracy around the world, US lost every bit of what was left of democracy and became a totalitarian superpower.
My point is about the song, which I find stupid. It implies people need to be reminded of how horrible war is. I believe in spreading democracy by whatever means, including war, if and when it makes sense. Of course I don't advocate foolish invasions like Iraq that will never work. The point is about the foolishness and immorality of pacifism. I am safe and free because of the sacrifices in war many others have made on my behalf.
War doesn't spread democracy and never did. Spreading democracy with the means of war is pure propaganda. It's Orwellian newspeak, war is peace. For somebody living in europe, you sound like archetypal american who thinks that enslaving countries around the world and robbing them of their resources is spreading democracy. Well, looks like by spreading democracy around the world, US lost every bit of what was left of democracy and became a totalitarian superpower.
This song is auto-parodic. It's so over the top it's almost delightful. All most. We made incessant fun of this, even as we fought against the Viet Nam madness. It's sucko-barfo in spite of its message.
rdo wrote:
My point is about the song, which I find stupid. It implies people need to be reminded of how horrible war is. I believe in spreading democracy by whatever means, including war, if and when it makes sense. Of course I don't advocate foolish invasions like Iraq that will never work. The point is about the foolishness and immorality of pacifism. I am safe and free because of the sacrifices in war many others have made on my behalf.
People DO need to be reminded of how horrible war is. It's easy for everyone in this country who didn't have to suffer one bit because of our wars in Iraq and Afganistan (we didn't even have to pay higher taxes) to lose sight of the horror of war. It's good to remind those who don't have a loved one "over there" just what the folks on the ground are facing.
My point is about the song, which I find stupid. It implies people need to be reminded of how horrible war is. I believe in spreading democracy by whatever means, including war, if and when it makes sense. Of course I don't advocate foolish invasions like Iraq that will never work. The point is about the foolishness and immorality of pacifism. I am safe and free because of the sacrifices in war many others have made on my behalf.
People DO need to be reminded of how horrible war is. It's easy for everyone in this country who didn't have to suffer one bit because of our wars in Iraq and Afganistan (we didn't even have to pay higher taxes) to lose sight of the horror of war. It's good to remind those who don't have a loved one "over there" just what the folks on the ground are facing.
mandolin wrote:
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
ummmmmm.....nope! I hate be the one to tell u this but...there's a humongous difference between political rebellion and butchering innocent women and children. if u want this to hit close to home reference ohhhh lets sayyy.....timothy mcveigh... i mean, that he actually was completely aware that there was a full day care center on the first floor kinda puts "freedom fighting' into perspective don'cha think
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
ummmmmm.....nope! I hate be the one to tell u this but...there's a humongous difference between political rebellion and butchering innocent women and children. if u want this to hit close to home reference ohhhh lets sayyy.....timothy mcveigh... i mean, that he actually was completely aware that there was a full day care center on the first floor kinda puts "freedom fighting' into perspective don'cha think
...y'know, some of us are trying to have a conversation about Seinfeld over here...
mandolin wrote:
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
...one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist...
Wrong - not if you believe in democracy. To say one is a freedom fighter against a democracy is a contradiction in terms.
woodchuk wrote:
I think you underestimate the power of state control and propaganda. You would not know you were living in a hell..you would think you are in the greatest country in the world! Moreover, overthrowing a government by force or otherwise requires hard work and putting something workable in its place is even more challenging. Do you think there is something special about you that would allow you to succeed where millions have failed before you? Ask the Syrian and Libyan rebels how hard it is to overthrow a dictator. It's more than just telling the world from the safety of your computer desk what a democratic patriot you are.... Those that talk too much often don't have the cojones for real action.
Great song, by the way...
My point is about the song, which I find stupid. It implies people need to be reminded of how horrible war is. I believe in spreading democracy by whatever means, including war, if and when it makes sense. Of course I don't advocate foolish invasions like Iraq that will never work. The point is about the foolishness and immorality of pacifism. I am safe and free because of the sacrifices in war many others have made on my behalf.
I think you underestimate the power of state control and propaganda. You would not know you were living in a hell..you would think you are in the greatest country in the world! Moreover, overthrowing a government by force or otherwise requires hard work and putting something workable in its place is even more challenging. Do you think there is something special about you that would allow you to succeed where millions have failed before you? Ask the Syrian and Libyan rebels how hard it is to overthrow a dictator. It's more than just telling the world from the safety of your computer desk what a democratic patriot you are.... Those that talk too much often don't have the cojones for real action.
Great song, by the way...
My point is about the song, which I find stupid. It implies people need to be reminded of how horrible war is. I believe in spreading democracy by whatever means, including war, if and when it makes sense. Of course I don't advocate foolish invasions like Iraq that will never work. The point is about the foolishness and immorality of pacifism. I am safe and free because of the sacrifices in war many others have made on my behalf.
Art_Carnage wrote:
Wrong again Elaine, you've gotta stop believing everything Jerry tells you.
Few people know it, but "War: What is it Good For" was the original title of "War & Peace".
Wrong again Elaine, you've gotta stop believing everything Jerry tells you.
rdo wrote:
I'll say it over and over again, and you will never, ever convince me otherwise. If I was a citizen of North Korea, or Cuba, or Syria, I would be actively plotting to overthrow the brutal, sadistic dictators and actively seeking out US assistance for liberation via war. I would risk anything, my life, everything. I would rather die than live in such a Hell.
Picked up a book about living in, and escaping from, North Korea. They KNOW this is hell. After all, the rabbits were eaten long ago, the berry crop was eaten before they could drop seedlings for next year, and the uppers in the capital were heavier and happier than any peasant. 5'2" is a towering height. Forget rebellion, think, fording the river to China. And maybe, if it works, get your mother out too.
I'll say it over and over again, and you will never, ever convince me otherwise. If I was a citizen of North Korea, or Cuba, or Syria, I would be actively plotting to overthrow the brutal, sadistic dictators and actively seeking out US assistance for liberation via war. I would risk anything, my life, everything. I would rather die than live in such a Hell.
Picked up a book about living in, and escaping from, North Korea. They KNOW this is hell. After all, the rabbits were eaten long ago, the berry crop was eaten before they could drop seedlings for next year, and the uppers in the capital were heavier and happier than any peasant. 5'2" is a towering height. Forget rebellion, think, fording the river to China. And maybe, if it works, get your mother out too.
Art_Carnage wrote:
Thankfully, Tolstoy's mistress talked him out of it.
Few people know it, but "War: What is it Good For" was the original title of "War & Peace".
Thankfully, Tolstoy's mistress talked him out of it.
Truly pathetic.
Sounds like "Mad Dog" is compensating for his teeny weenie.
Or he didn't get enough hugs from Daddy.