+- AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums (https://ai-jane.org)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://ai-jane.org/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: International Politics (https://ai-jane.org/forum-13.html)
+--- Thread: Gorbachev Slams American Empire (/thread-4343.html)
Gorbachev Slams American Empire - John L - 07-28-2007
Most people don't do things without some perceived reason. I wonder why he say this? Is it 'sour grapes', an attempt to gain attention, or what?
Quote:U.S.-led policy complicating situation worldwide - Gorbachev
MOSCOW. July 27 (Interfax) - Former USSR President Mikhail
Gorbachev has said that the complicated situation in the world is
largely due to the position of the United States, which suffers from
"winner complex."
"The U.S. is always anxious to win. The fact that they suffer from
this disorder, the winner complex, is the main reason why things are so
complicated in the world," Gorbachev said at a press conference at
Interfax on Friday.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. felt like it had
its hands untied, he said.
"They forced the war in Europe. They thought that now they have a
chance and must create a new empire. All intellectual and political
forces were involved. Now everything has calmed down. It was wishful
thinking," Gorbachev said.
The end of the Cold War is both sides' achievement, he said.
"We all lost in the Cold War, and all benefited from its end. We
lost, and the U.S. did, as each spent 10 trillion dollars on the arms
race. Without our proposal there would be nothing: no end to the Cold
War, no decision to reduce nuclear weapons," he said.
- track_snake - 07-29-2007
Well. Gorbachev is disappointed he was not more remembered ny the world for what he did. Actually he was the one behind democracy in the former communist countries.
He is not quite wrong either in what he says.
/track_snake
- Anonymous24 - 07-29-2007
Here's his point: the U.S. is overconfident, and is fucking everything up because of it. I agree. He just phrased it really strangely. Maybe something was lost in the translation, maybe Russians phrase 'overconfidence' as 'winner complex'.
- Stars & Stripes - 07-29-2007
I think Gorbachev is trying to redeem himself in Russia. He's wildly unpopular among Russians for his role in breaking apart the SU. Bashing America is an easy and safe way for a politician to appeal to the general Russian public.
-S
- Palladin - 07-29-2007
I agree with you S&S,but truthfully,what is it he said you disagree with? It's not that bad,of course we want to always win,so did he,that's nothing bad and he's absolutely correct in that we forced the war in the Balkans if that's what he was alluding to.
Generally,his statement is hardly that bad.
- Green - 07-29-2007
It's just a larger campaign for Luis Vuitton leather bags.
- Green - 07-29-2007
Solzhenitsyn's interview to Spiegel is more interesting.
- jt - 07-29-2007
The Spiegel interview is very interesting, thanks Green.
One comment: Gorbachev said
Quote: "The U.S. is always anxious to win. ...Does this mean the USSR was not anxious to win in the cold war?
- John L - 07-29-2007
jt Wrote:The Spiegel interview is very interesting, thanks Green.
One comment: Gorbachev saidQuote: "The U.S. is always anxious to win. ...Does this mean the USSR was not anxious to win in the cold war?
I was going to comment on this earlier, but thought it may be considered petty. However, now that it is on the table, let me state Gorbachev's poor use of English. Americans are derfinately not "Anxious" to win. They are Always "Eager" to win. There is a big difference between the two words. And while the former has been worming it's way into that of the later, it is really a 'pretender'. If you wish to show willingness, then the word to use is "eager".
- Green - 07-29-2007
"Eager" or "anxious" ? I don't think it is very important. Gorbie doesn't speak English publicly.
His words:
Quote:Так Ñ Ð¾ÑеÑÑÑ Ð°Ð¼ÐµÑиканÑам бÑÑÑ Ð¿Ð¾Ð±ÐµÐ´Ð¸ÑелÑми. Ð Ñо, ÑÑо они болеÑÑ ÑÑой болезнÑÑ, комплекÑом победиÑелÑ, ÑÑо оÑÐ½Ð¾Ð²Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¿ÑиÑина Ñого, ÑÑо Ñ Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð² миÑе Ñак вÑе ÑейÑÐ°Ñ Ð·Ð°Ð¿ÑÑано и оÑложнено.They want so much to be winners. That they are sick with this disorder, "winner's complex" is the main reason why things in the world are so complicated.
Quote:Ðни навÑзали Ð²Ð¾Ð¹Ð½Ñ Ð² ÐвÑопе. ÐÑмали, ÑÑо воÑ, пÑиÑел ÑанÑ, и они Ð´Ð¾Ð»Ð¶Ð½Ñ ÑоздаÑÑ Ð½Ð¾Ð²ÑÑ Ð¸Ð¼Ð¿ÐµÑиÑ. ÐÑоÑÐµÐ½Ñ Ð±Ñли вÑе ÑилÑ, инÑеллекÑÑалÑнÑе, полиÑиÑеÑкие. СейÑÐ°Ñ Ð²Ñе заÑÐ¸Ñ Ð»Ð¾. ÐÑо бÑла попÑÑка вÑдаÑÑ Ð¶ÐµÐ»Ð°ÐµÐ¼Ð¾Ðµ за дейÑÑвиÑелÑное.They imposed war on Europe. They thought the chance came and they must create a new empire. All the forces, intellectual and political were thrust. Now everything quiet. It was an attempt of wishful thinking.
Quote:"ÐÑе Ð¼Ñ Ð¿ÑоигÑали во вÑÐµÐ¼Ñ Ñ Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ войнÑ, и вÑе вÑигÑали Ð¾Ñ Ñого, ÑÑо она законÑилаÑÑ. ÐÑоигÑали Ð¼Ñ Ð¸, пÑежде вÑего, амеÑиканÑÑ â по 10 ÑÑиллионов изÑаÑÑ Ð¾Ð´Ð¾Ð²Ð°Ð»Ð¸ на Ð³Ð¾Ð½ÐºÑ Ð²Ð¾Ð¾ÑÑжений. Ðез наÑей иниÑиаÑÐ¸Ð²Ñ Ð½Ð¸Ñего Ð±Ñ Ð½Ðµ полÑÑилоÑÑ - ни ÐºÐ¾Ð½ÐµÑ Ñ Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ войнÑ, ни пÑинÑÑие ÑеÑений о ÑокÑаÑении ÑдеÑного оÑÑÐ¶Ð¸Ñ Ð¸ Ñак далее"We all lost during Cold War and we all won when it ended. We lost and most of all, Americans - they spent $10 trillion on arms race. Without our initiative nothing would happen - no end of Cold war, no decisions about reduction of nuclear weapons and so on.
- Lithium - 07-29-2007
sounds more informed than Bush at least.
I agree with him in theory, but then I don't really know where he's coming from on this. Is he really just bashing the U.S? because if he is that's fine with me, just not very interesting
- Green - 07-29-2007
Gorbachev is pro-Putin. Of course, he criticizes him for some things like "stifling" of media, but Gorbie's political course is not too opposite to the current one.
In fact today, if you want to be interesting to the public you have to be pro-government to a degree.
- Stars & Stripes - 07-29-2007
Quote:Is he really just bashing the U.S? because if he is that's fine with me, just not very interesting
No, I don't think he's bashing the US because there's nothing better to do with his time in retirement. I think he's trying to secure a personal legacy in Russia as a winner, or at least someone who had the correct vision of the future, rather than a complete loser. Putin looks to be classified as a winner in Russian history. Gorby is just trying to ride on Putin's bandwagon, and hope that his own personal legacy will be somewhat elevated by aligning himself with Putinesque ideals and rhetoric.
Bottome line: Gorby's thinking about what will be written about him in Russian school history books, and it's not looking particularly flattering.
That's my view of things.
-S
- bh - 07-30-2007
Stars & Stripes Wrote:Bottome line: Gorby's thinking about what will be written about him in Russian school history books, and it's not looking particularly flattering.
What else Gorby could tell, if all his agreements with West were broken by West? He was naive politician and it will be in history books always. Reagan tried to explain him in russian: "Doveriay, no proveriay", but naive Gorby decided it was joke.
- John L - 07-30-2007
bh Wrote:Stars & Stripes Wrote:Bottome line: Gorby's thinking about what will be written about him in Russian school history books, and it's not looking particularly flattering.
What else Gorby could tell, if all his agreements with West were broken by West? He was naive politician and it will be in history books always. Reagan tried to explain him in russian: "Doveriay, no proveriay", but naive Gorby decided it was joke.
I have a different take on this. I view him as someone, who realized that acting as an immovable object before an unstoppable force, would not bode well for the former. Therefore, rather than throw in the towel, he attempted to use a flexible response, which only played out the sequence over time. That's all.
- bh - 07-30-2007
John L Wrote:Therefore, rather than throw in the towel, he attempted to use a flexible response, which only played out the sequence over time.This "flexible response" was appointed with some agreements, first of all about widening of NATO and Gorby took this agreements seriously in contrast to US. He beleived in honesty of american politicins, it's his main mistake.
"Unstoppable force" could be stopped easily in 1991 by threat of nuclear weapons. That's why Soviet army wouldn't leave Germany without POLITICAL decision by Gorby. It would be in Germany for today.
- John L - 07-30-2007
bh Wrote:John L Wrote:Therefore, rather than throw in the towel, he attempted to use a flexible response, which only played out the sequence over time.This "flexible response" was appointed with some agreements, first of all about widening of NATO and Gorby took this agreements seriously in contrast to US. He beleived in honesty of american politicins, it's his main mistake.
"Unstoppable force" could be stopped easily in 1991 by threat of nuclear weapons. That's why Soviet army wouldn't leave Germany without POLITICAL decision by Gorby. It would be in Germany for today.
Obviously your 'unstoppable force' is not the 'unstoppable force' I was referring to. Mine was that of Liberty, where those behind the Iron Curtain would have many of the liberties denied them for over 70 years. Tyranny can only endure but for so long, before the forces of Liberty eventually pull it down.
- bh - 07-30-2007
John L Wrote:Obviously your 'unstoppable force' is not the 'unstoppable force' I was referring to. Mine was that of Liberty, where those behind the Iron Curtain would have many of the liberties denied them for over 70 years. Tyranny can only endure but for so long, before the forces of Liberty eventually pull it down.Amen!
Explain your point for Iraqis.
- John L - 07-30-2007
bh Wrote:John L Wrote:Obviously your 'unstoppable force' is not the 'unstoppable force' I was referring to. Mine was that of Liberty, where those behind the Iron Curtain would have many of the liberties denied them for over 70 years. Tyranny can only endure but for so long, before the forces of Liberty eventually pull it down.Amen!
Explain your point for Iraqis.
What's to explain to you here? I don't understand.
- bh - 07-30-2007
John L Wrote:What's to explain to you here? I don't understand.For me? Nothing...
Liberty can be "unstoppable force" only if it's perfectly organised as a military unstoppable force. Otherwise dictator Franko smash freedomeloving anarchists with their beloved liberties without problems.