Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
(Toggle Right Side Navigation)

Song Parodies -> "Showdown"

Original Song Title:


Original Performer:


Parody Song Title:


Parody Written by:

Robert D. Arndt Jr.

The Lyrics

21st century sucks
Too many innocent lives at stake
Diplomacy's bound to break
Over and over, over and over

ISIS makes a new thrust
Iran's political games
US/Israel dismayed
Climate of real fear, climate of real fear

Destroyers, destroyers
Someday will be sent to fight
Destroyers, destroyers
Will set the Middle East alight

When it goes down, when it goes down
US/Israel will bring the big guns out
Sending nuke tipped, cruise missiles inbound
Good and evil will have a showdown
When the world gets too cruel, bad guys will shudder
In a fair fight, Islam loses its fighters (Sunni-Shia)
When it goes down, when it goes down
Good and evil will have a showdown

When everything is crying "War!"
Netanyahu-Churchill spell
Arriving at the gates of hell
We have to act strong, fighting what is wrong

Too much blood in the sand
Suffering of the righteous man
Someone's gotta take a stand
This can't go on, terror for so long



Sometimes you gotta use might
To basically survive in this mad mad world, in this sad sad world
Evil can't fight the light
Shall not forever thrive in this mad mad world, in this sad sad world



Everything will turn out right... right???
Daylight after blackest night
With mushrooms in a crimson sky
Islamofacism will then die...



Your Vote & Comment Counts

The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.

Place Your Vote

Matches Pace of
Original Song: 
How Funny: 
Overall Score: 

In order for your vote to count, you need to hit the 'Place Your Vote' button.

Voting Results

Pacing: 4.5
How Funny: 4.4
Overall Rating: 4.4

Total Votes: 26

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

    Pacing How Funny Overall Rating
 1   3
 2   0
 3   1
 4   0
 5   22

User Comments

Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.

Dr. Merkw├╝rdigliebe - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Right on! Down with diplomacy. Up with "mushrooms in a crimson sky." "Someone's gotta take a stand" and go to war, and it sure as hell won't be you.
Nuclear Winter - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Fueled by biblically-inspired wrath and personal impotence, this idiot is ready to nuke a couple billion people. He is, with certainty, advocating the end of life on this planet. Is that, his fans, what you want?
Long Memory - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
You cite Churchill, but you don't know history. Winnie said, "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war."
Rob Arndt - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Ha! The impotent liberals chime in... let me guess....from impotent Europe and Oz perhaps? If from the US, weak DEM impotence. Let's see, how has diplomacy worked with Vlad in Russia over Ukraine, or with N Korea's Kim Jong Un, ISIS, Hezbollah, Iran's nuke ambitions, etc... ??? Musical UN chairs where third world despots send reps to play games with the West and beg for handouts. Who keeps getting killed in the meantime? Western hostages, Western citizens, and a multitude of innocents all over the ME and Africa. What's Islam's chant in the region? Hmm... "Death to Israel" and "Death to the United States!!! ". Forgive me for not being an excuse-making CIC Obama. At least Netanyahu is as Israeli papers report " channeling the spirit of Churchill against the Nazis" in the face of the then 1940 planned invasion. Israel knows that a redline is being reached and unlike Obama over Syrian nerve gas, won't allow the enemy to strike them with any form of WMD. And the US knows ISIS is a threat to everyone. But so far Obama and the West are taking the "appease Hitler on land grabbing" approach. The air strikes are a joke and ineffective. Can you liberate hostages with drones? No, just kill a couple! Can aircraft hold ground? No again. All gains reversed every time ISIS merely changes direction. Imagine if those thugs had a backpack nuke. Say goodbye to... (Insert target city here). I say the use of napalm, cluster munitions, and TAC nukes isn't unreasonable at all, but that's just me... and a whole bunch of other people around the world that don't have their heads up their behinds!!! BTW, anyone who supports doing nothing is supporting the Iranian and ISIS ideal of genocide against both the Jews and the infidels ( West).
Final Solution - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
It is up to Chucky to rid this site of mad men like you.
Rob Arndt - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Amazing stupidity FS as your SN contradicts your comment!!! BTW, using tactical low-yield nukes isn't Armageddon by any assessment. Kilotons vs Megatons. Quite a difference. And in a desert? Please be sure to actually understand nuclear weaponry before making stupid statements.
William Shakespeare - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
"I say the use of napalm, cluster munitions, and TAC nukes isn't unreasonable at all..." Why, friends or AIR, you go to approve you know not what. Wherein hath Arndt thus deserved your loves? Alas, you know not.
We'll Meet Again - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
How soon before kilotons turn into megatons? Fool! Miserable Fool! It is the fact of using nukes at all which will start Vera Lynn to sing.
Rob Arndt - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
If you could go back and stop 9/11 , would you? Of course, 3000 people died that day. But you want to allow Iran to develop nukes that they SWEAR they WILL USE against Israel. The same nukes that could be provided to Hezbollah or from future nukes in proliferation by Saudi Arabia or other rich Gulf states as counter to Iran's? You seem to care little if Haifa or Tel Aviv disappear in a flash. And WMA... nukes WILL be used again. It's not a matter of IF but WHEN.
Rational - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
You have no concept of diplomatic leverage and economic sanctions and the power of successful culture to defeat sociopathic movements. Your own sociopathic strategy of all-out nuclear war is self-defeating. You know nothing but violence. You are no better than an ISIS fanatic. And so, I suggest you become a martyr as soon as possible.
Rob Arndt - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Rational? Not really. Have diplomatic channels and sanctions stopped Iran's nuclear weapons program? Yes or no. No!!! Lifting sanctions will only embolden them to lie and cheat and move on with their goal which is directly aimed at destroying the state of Israel. Netanyahu has warned of the approaching redline which is now under 1 year. You should have followed what he said to Congress and his re-election promises. Also, the above does not advocate all-out nuclear war. Napalm and cluster munitions are not nuclear and LY TAC nukes are in Kt. If I had to choose Israel or Iran for survival, I choose the former which is an ally of the United States. Certainly not the terror sponsor state of Iran that you want to protect.
Rob Arndt - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
BTW Rational, without military forces and arms, you couldn't say anything here. Freedom isn't free. I love military hardware and military history... so what??? No crime. Sociopaths also don't support a multitude of charities, including Istaeli., nor take care of children, the homeless, etc... You don't know me and can't judge any person here based on parody topics. I write about a lot of things. Your reactionary response shows that you can't handle different opinions. I bet you would hail MacArthur as hero, but then again he wanted to use nukes against China... I agree with him. Also, many in SAC wanted to nuke the USSR when we had the advantage. Were they all insane or merely rational? LOL!!!
Persia Pete - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
As I recall, the CIA overthrew duly elected President Mohammad Mossadegh in 1954 and installed Shah Pahlevi. He and his SAVAK torturers terrorized Iran for 25 years, but you had easy access to our oil. Do you wonder why we don't trust you and call you the Great Satan? Now you want to nuke and napalm us and any attempt at diplomacy is viewed by you as a trip to Munich by Chamberlain. Have you any idea how much opposition there is here against the rule of mullahs? Instead of supporting the young Iranians who want to join the rest of the world, you want to throw cluster bombs at us! You are plain stupid, and you can go to hell and smoke a cigar with Curtis LeMay.
Max Power - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Whenever Rob submits a parody, one can always expect the comments section to escalate.
Casey Jones - April 27, 2015 - Report this comment
Yeah, reading his "parodies" is like watching a train wreck.
Patrick - April 30, 2015 - Report this comment
The problem is not just blood in the sand, it is sand in the air. The whole region is subject to massive dust storms. When that stuff turns radioactive, it's all over for the Middle East and anyone who is depending on their oil. The world needs some rational leaders right now.
Rob Arndt - May 02, 2015 - Report this comment
Remember that in both Gulf Wars (relating to the West), Saddam had threaten to use chemical rockets against both Israel and the West. Both times, the US and UK (as well as Israel) threatened counters of tactical nuclear weapons. They were on the table and readily available. This was the real reason Iraq did not use chemical agents... NOT that the West would hold Iraqi commanders responsible for crimes against humanity as is widely believed. Desert or no desert, tactical nukes were threatened. And, US carriers also carry these on occasion, defying porting rules around the world. Nuclear weapons oft disguised pass through major US cities, air bases, etc... no matter what the official rules are. The US Government's official policy in reality is that there are no official policies it obeys. In wartime, even less...
Rob Arndt - May 07, 2015 - Report this comment
To my nuclear critics- it's official: Putin threatens nukes if war comes to Ukraine or border nations. Again, not a question of IF but WHEN and by WHOM??? I say Israel is best candidate, N Korea second, Russia third, China fourth, and US fifth. Any large Pakistan-India war guaranteed use. Any backpack nuke delivered to ISIS, Al Qaida, or Hezbollah also guaranteed use against Israel. This is just common sense.
We'll Meet Again - May 07, 2015 - Report this comment
Wrong again, Arndt. Putin threatens nukes. So does Kim. You take that literally, as usual, and turn it into one of your beloved facts in your relish to witness the sensational inferno of the End of Days. What Putin is doing is saber-rattling. Old as the hills. It's what Vlad calls DIPLOMACY. If anything, it's a measure of his desperation over sanctions and NATO's more active posture on his west flank. Putin is not crazy. He knows that if he is first to use nuclear weapons, Russia will be a radioactive hole in the ground. The concept of mutually assured destruction is alive and well. So is nuclear winter and the end of life on Earth. Everybody loses in a pre-emptive nuclear attack. A nuclear attack is not a one-off event. This isn't August 1945 anymore. Now hit me with your irrelevant arcana. Try to keep it under 10,000 words.
Woody - May 07, 2015 - Report this comment
19 straight 5s! The scoring is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham.
Rob's silent majority - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
No Woody, the scoring is for real. It's just that we're all so awed by Arendt's parody brilliance, we are unable to make any comments in support. That's how Arndt can earn the highest score of 2015, even as nobody writes anything like "Good effort, Rob."
Rob Arndt - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Why would I bother WMA? You're the fool that hasn't learned anything from 9/11, asymmetrical warfare, and unchecked nuclear proliferation. Russia, btw, has more nukes than the US and all other nuclear powers combined, more powerful nukes, and better delivery systems. They also possess the only doomsday system active- Perimeter that can fight on after all Command and Control is destroyed. It will direct Russian subs and the underground missile railway to keep attacking. But... you have the right to express your idiotic opinions not supported by military facts. MAD was dead when 9/11 occurred. The US cannot fight terrorists and asymmetrical warriors that seek nukes, nor deter world leaders that do not fear the consequences of unleashing nuclear hell on their enemies. BTW, the correct word for today's conflict is brinksmanship, but this time Russia will not back down as in '62.
Woody - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
@ Rob's silent majority -- Writing "Arendt" instead of "Arndt" is a very interesting slip. Nothing describes the latter better than "the banality of evil."

@ Rob -- You obviously think we must have enough nukes "to make the rubble bounce." Remember: We must not allow a mineshaft gap.
Military Historian - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
In 1937-38, after inventing the Time Machine, Germany embarked on development of its most powerful weapon, intended to demoralize the American parody industry. You can learn all about it from the TV series Nazi Mega Weapons, which is funnier than Adult Swim. It is the rapid-fire, fully automatic 5s generator. Only one prototype remains in existence, somewhere in California. Subsequently, Spike Jones was inspired to write:
Are we not the Supermen?
Aryan pure Supermen?
Ja, we are the Supermen
(Super duper Supermen)
We'll Meet Again - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Russia has indeed backed down, otherwise Ukraine would have long been re-incorporated by force into the Russian Empire. Also, the mere possession of a nuclear arsenal is still a MAD deterrent, guaranteeing a standoff. Asymmetrical warfare? We know, for example, the territory of the "Islamic State" and, if they employ a suitcase nuke in Times Square, they and their State will be ashes. If nuclear terrorism is abetted by weak host states like Somalia, Yemen, etc., etc., why we could, and probably would, annihilate them. We have zero tolerance for nuclear attacks. Terrorists know better than to use nukes. They're successful without them. But all of that will not make this a better or safer world. We and others of the West must improve our societies with liberty and justice for all. The best revenge is living well.
Rob Arndt - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Let's stick to cold hard facts, shall we? Just two days ago Ukraine reported that during the ceasefire 28 more Ukrainian towns had fallen and that upwards of 50,000 separatists supplied by Russian forces were active as well as covert Russian forces unmarked in the nation. The conflict they say "is worsening", not getting better. Meanwhile, Russia has assembled 50,000 troops along the border with another 35,000 on standby. NATO by comparison is trying (key word) to assemble a Joint Strike Force of 13,000 troops but only has 5000 at this time. Russian airborne and special forces alone run another 50,000 troops and their weapons inventory is not only greater, but can be moved right from the border instead of NATO air and sea corridors. Who has the advantage? Russia. Who wants a new Russian Empire? Putin. Who is willing to use nukes if necessary? Putin. If the US and UK were willing to put TAC nukes on the table for the Gulf Wars, do you honestly think Putin won't do the same? Russia has more of this type as well. These are facts.
Rob Arndt - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Fools: Chamberlain 1938- "Peace in our time" and USA Number One Types- "No one will ever attack the US again." The former was wrong Sept 1,1939 and the latter Sept 11, 2001. Obama warned of Redline retaliation against Syria and flaked once it became known that Sarin gas had been used. It is 2015 and the US cannot even take on Syria or ISIS. The puny pinprick air attacks have availed nothing. Aircraft can't hold ground. And how has the US done in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, and against export terrorism? If you can't win in conventional war, what makes any American think they can win in nuclear war? Russia has more nukes and a more comprehensive underground survival infrastructure plus an active doomsday system for second, third, fourth strike. My personal opinion is that SAC missed the opportunity window early on in the Cold War to wipe the USSR off the face of the earth. And, we should have never cancelled the Vought SLAM!!!
The Observer - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Asperger's Syndrome.
Rob Arndt - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
Above comment by low IQ liberal with delusions of normalcy...
We'll Meet Again - May 08, 2015 - Report this comment
One can't tell from an egregiously rude diagnosis whether the offender is a liberal. Schmuck? Yes.

The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.

Link To This Page

The address of this page is: For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.

This is view # 911