It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


War...A declaration to confuse.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:58 AM
Hello again friends.

"War, what is it good for, absolutely nothing...say it again"...(The band) War

I always loved that song along with Low Rider from War, which is appropriate as that is what I want to open up conversation to the subject of War and what it means to each individual.

I am going to start with the definition of War, that is, it's Etymology. I will use it's etymological start because I believe it is important to know where words come from and the "original" intended meaning for them.

This is the importance of oral tradition amongst people to preserve what the oration intended lest it be interpreted by an outside faction not knowing the tradition and thus corrupting its meaning.

Bear in mind that a words true meanings play a very important role in what is legal and what is not, for things that are open to interpretation are not stable and wither or not you learn that is up to you as a free man or woman. Understanding the words that admit, submit, or permit is the difference between subjection and objection.


war Look up war at
late O.E. (c.1050), wyrre, werre, from O.N.Fr. werre "war" (Fr. guerre), from Frank. *werra, from P.Gmc. *werso (cf. O.S. werran, O.H.G. werran, Ger. verwirren "to confuse, perplex"). Cognates suggest the original sense was "to bring into confusion." There was no common Gmc. word for "war" at the dawn of historical times. O.E. had many poetic words for "war" (guð, heaðo, hild, wig, all common in personal names), but the usual one to translate L. bellum was gewin "struggle, strife" (related to win). Sp., Port., It. guerra are from the same source; Romanic peoples turned to Gmc. for a word to avoid L. bellum because its form tended to merge with bello- "beautiful." The verb meaning "to make war on" is recorded from mid-12c. First record of war time is late 14c. Warpath (1775) is from N.Amer. Ind., as are war-whoop (1761), war-paint (1826), war-path (1775), and war-dance (1757). War crime first attested 1906. War chest is attested from 1901; now usually figurative. War games translates Ger. Kriegspiel (see kriegspiel).

So, going back to what war originally meant, we see that it was "to confuse or perplex". Perhaps this is why War is always fought in a "theater", as it is about tricking your opponent with confusion and to do that you must draw them into a theater, that is their pondering, their thoughts and emotions.


theater Look up theater at
late 14c., "open air place in ancient times for viewing spectacles," from O.Fr. theatre (12c.), from L. theatrum, from Gk. theatron "theater," lit. "place for viewing," from theasthai "to behold" (cf. thea "a view," theates "spectator") + -tron, suffix denoting place. Meaning "building where plays are shown" (1570s) was transferred to that of "plays, writing, production, the stage" (1660s). Spelling with -re prevailed in Britain after c.1700, but Amer.Eng. retained or revived the older spelling in -er. Generic sense of "place of action" is from 1580s; especially "region where war is being fought" (1914).

The Theatre of the Absurd strives to express its sense of the senselessness of the human condition and the inadequacy of the rational approach by the open abandonment of rational devices and discursive thought. [M. Esslin, "Theatre of the Absurd," 1961]

From "Theater" we draw "an open air place in ancient times for viewing spectacles".

Together now we may use "the theater of War". You've heard this many times in your life, but with the original meaning let us render it to understand it as laymen.

"An open air place for viewing spectacles to confuse or perplex". Note with the use of these words so far there is not involved any mention of killing or destruction, only confusing or perplexing as the "deviant" act. Simple meaning...To trick the Viewer.

I ask you to consider what open air means to today's "theater" of war and what is "Broadcast" through it for the viewer to see.

When you consider what war is about, the nationalism behind it, the propaganda, and that it is about the mind and not the body, then you begin to see where it is imperative to fight the war at...The theater of the Mind.

This clip is from the movie "Wag the Dog" and if you haven't seen it I suggest it to you. It is very entertaining and provoking. To set it up, Robert Deniro's character has just flown to Hollywood to seek out a producer (Dustin Hoffman's Character) to produce a "War" to divert the public knowledge of a scandal much similar to the Clinton/Lewinsky motif from which it is based. Deniro's character is a shady "Go-to guy" in times of crisis for dignitaries. He creates a problem artificially then solves it with the credit going to his employer. You never find out what it is exactly that he does officially.

Here is the clip

Now though this is only a movie, but remember art imitates life. Consider the power of this medium to tell you truth and lies. This power is perhaps stronger then that of ancient prophets in that it's reach is vast and it's messages as powerful as evangelists taking in profits. A war for a soul is a war for a mind and to subject it's body, under that mind for where the head goes the body will follow.

Here is something to consider. You have heard that in the American revolutionary war that one of the ways that the American colonists were able to obtain victory was through the use of Guerrilla Tactics. These tactics were not "in the rulebook" and took the British forces by complete surprise as they would line up and volley.

A great parody is done in this next clip by "The Whitest Kids You Know" and is titled "the polite war". Have a look.

I love that clip and think it speaks volumes to how absurd it is in battle to play by any rules of engagement that are not your own. A victor cares not how fair the fight was, only that their way is preserved. In the case of the colonists, our forefathers, the story details that not playing by the rules helped in victory to a greater cause...our country.

Not playing by the rules

You've heard the term "Layman's Term" before no doubt.

layman Look up layman at
"non-cleric," early 15c., from lay (adj.) + man. Meaning "outsider, non-expert" (especially in regards to law or medicine) is from late 15c. Related: Laymen.

Knowledge is good and evil and so also are the words that express knowledge, they are double sided all of them, for there is the true meaning of the knowledge, that is the traced knowledge and the perceived meaning of the knowledge. "Eve" so to speak, was fooled because of what was seemingly good to her was also laced with evil, thus the snake played off of one part and it's benefits. In this metaphor did the snake lie or did the snake not reveal all the details? Did God not say, "The man has become as one of us, to know both good and evil, now lest he take from the tree of life and live a lifetime:" Knowledge of Nudity, was "Response-ability".

In what way does exposing wrongs wrong ourselves ultimately and in who's theater are we fighting? Is it not the World Wide Web of information? Did you notice "Tron" in the word "Theatron"? I love this trailer, but listen carefully to what is said and remember who's theater your in and how much info has been thrown in the net willingly, a net someone is pulling in.

Consider, you older members, why you never hear of spies anymore or secret agents which was "Cold War" language. With the meaning of War expressed just look at what the Cold War was...."Mutually Assured Destruction". A cold confusion in which both at opposition seemingly agreed to the "cold" rules of engagement, yet as the past has shown, their are no rules in war that knowledge can't undermine. In the case of the colonists it was the knowledge that the British forces would play by the rules of engagement among the European States which gave them the advantage. Ambush had begun.

Here is a great clip from the movie "spies like us" and is a great example of double talk.

How many press conferences like that have you watched in your lifetime? How about like this one?

Yes, ludicrous, but far from the truth? I like when the guy says, "you had me till you said cartel, then I was like Whhaaaaat."

War is not force, rather it is subtle and covert as to "confuse". When you are confused, you don't know what is right or wrong, for though something may have the appearance of Good (ex. Truth Movement) but it is double sided and in another light perhaps that is just what it is, A movement to find the truth amongst the people. Since the cause initiated it and covered it over (the truth) how will uncovering it not show us evil

"Gotta give credit, where credit is due" What if credit was given to find out from whom credit would be due for in all reality money is worthless and credit an agreement. Where does the buck stop? The innocent, though confused will still do what is right, but the guilty (having judged themselves) look to cast judgment wanting "blood" and eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

In all I believe the next world wide war will be fought with information and bringing it to light good or bad. The governments are not going anywhere, but are established by their people and being afraid of the people and lawlessness, are pursuing to separate those who would stay true from those who would rebel.

I don't think there is a master diabolical plan, but I do believe that something is coming and that thinning the heard is required for this juncture. Comfort is letting your guard down, that is, not holding on to things you know are true. Are you comfortable fighting a war for things that seem right?

Things aren't always what they appear to be...War is the perfect example.

Off to bed.


posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 06:12 AM

War, what is it good for

Fooor... raping, pillaging, stealing, venting, selling organs, profiting, selling drugs, trading kids anything, weapons, prostitution, cheap slavery, forceful agreements, false religions, spreading madness, cheap oil, cheap mining, profiting, maintaining status quo, fear-mongering, producing idiocracy, maintaining ignorance, blinding the masses, barbaric customs, scientific experiments, profiting etc. etc.

Yeah.... who needs those things, right? Oh wait... we do

Rules of the game: do not think, do not ask, mind your business, support the military. Not living by the rules only gets you into trouble. Obey the rules! My violence maintains your content.

Sorry for rant! Very nice thread man, and very funny videos there - cheers!

posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 05:21 PM
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

In the words of the great daffy duck. "You sir are despicable" How dare you use your head and try to figure things out, and who told you to look at the root of what words mean, that is a no no. But I'll tell you one thing war and opposition is the crux on what all life is. And everything else is one form or another of the original. Even civilization is just a way to get along without killing each other, on a level to be civilized is to play by the rules, but on another as you vid of the British vs American war says, playing by the rules is not always in benefit to you or all, most times the rules are written in stone for the benefit of whoever wrote them in stone.

new topics

log in