Talk:We will bury you

message: Is it neccessary to have this page present?  I propose that it be merged with the Khrushchev article where it most applies. --Zippanova 05:54, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It will only clutter the main article. It is a very separate topic, and it is normal to keep such things separate, while other articles may have a brief summary instead. Mikkalai 06:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: Saturday 17th or Sunday 18th? The two sources differ on the date. Bastie 20:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on articles in Time ("We Will Bury You!", Nov. 26, 1956) and The New York Times ("Khrushchev Tirade Again Irks Envoys", Nov. 19, 1956), there were two events that weekend at which Khrushchev made anti-Western remarks to ambassadors, the first on November 17th and the second on November 18th. According to the Time article, the "we will bury you" quote was made at the second event, i.e. on the 18th. --Cam (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A ref addded to the article. You could have done it yrself. Thanks for the hint anyway.`'Míkka>t 02:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I wanted to mention it here in Talk first in case someone knew about better evidence for the other date. Also the Time article doesn't actually give the date, but it describes it enough that we can figure out it was the 18th they are talking about. I'll add the NYT ref to bolster it.--Cam (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: date

message: I'm not competent to comment on the precise meaning in Russian idiom of the time, but I do believe that to be largely irrelevant. What matters above all else is what Western politicians and populations THOUGHT IT MEAN'T after making allowances for the fact that the precise quote was unlikely to be communicated to them accurately anyhow. What they thought it mean't (as I myself recollect from that time) was that it was a threat, and a real threat. Secondly, given that it was generally percieved in the West as a threat, it was a factor in defence planning. That's what defence planners are for; to plan ahead on the basis of what they know. And they knew that Khrushchev's threat APPEARED TO THEM to be a real one. In Britain in particular, it was one of a number of factors that led government to the conclusion that the U.K. must accellerate efforts to acquire an independent nuclear force, that at the time of Khruschev's threat barely existed; their first fission bomb was only delivered to the airforce in 1953 and there were no aircraft able to carry it. A U.K. thermonuclear bomb was not tested until two years after Mr K's threat, and was then several more years from deployment. Brian.Burnell 16:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Largely irrelevant? Come on. This is a standard example of a quotation being deliberately misinterpreted and used to fuel public fear. The Western governments were not going to base military strategy on a single comment. That's absurd.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:14, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: both of you - WP:FORUM !!!! 104.169.37.99 (talk) 03:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Perception of the remark in the West

message: "The translation has been controversial because it was presented as being belligerent out of context. The phrase may well have been intended to mean the Soviet Union would outlast the West, as a more complete version of the quote reads: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you"—a meaning more akin to "we will attend your funeral" than "we shall cause your funeral"."
: The part about "slaves to collectivism" exists just in your imagination, it was not actually said; capitalist and communist economies both lead to collectivist slavery one no less and no more than another, just in different ways. Surely, Khrushchov did not mean a slavery version of communism, so it is strange to interpret his words in the sense "you'll be enslaved". This is just a strange interpretation, not a fact. - 89.110.31.26 (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "visits his grave": ROTLMAO `'Míkka 19:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The McDuck remark is funny. No, I won't ask that unless I want to destroy my health. The remark is of the kind "made shit, am happy" (please do not take this personally, I do not mean exactly you). ;)
It is clearly a belligerent statement and the offending paragraph in the article quoted above is an effort in excuse making and obscurantism. The article should present the quote in its full context but it should not attempt to engage in original research and speculation about what the phrase "may have been intended to mean" in an effort to obscure the very obvious meaning of a boorish, offensive and belligerent threat at the height of the cold war. I doubt this needs extensive talk page discussion, especially when considered in its true context; diplomatic language that is carefully crafted to convey specific meanings and limitations of a governments foreign policy. The offending section of the article as its stands is not history and it does not inform, is it historical revisionism and playing Khrushchev apologist. 58.173.51.73 (talk) 15:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

text: You are talking nonsense. When heard this sentence, one could possibly take an offence (if he is sure he just cannot be wrong in anything), but no one would ever see this as a physical threat. The sentence simply means "we definitely shall win" in a joking manner. You could say that to your friend safely if the context is some competition. It is no speculation, it is a fact of language. The sentence is "clearly belligrent" in nothing but your imagination. - 89.110.31.26 (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of Context? 

message: Here is the original text:
"Нравится вам или нет, но история на нашей стороне. Мы вас закопаем". And this is not what original article states.
Literal translation "Мы вас закопаем" is a slang and it means "win over you after long struggle".
No, it does not mean "outlast". And of course it does not mean "kill" or "put somebody in the grave".
Source: Gorbachev's
"Перестройка и новое мышление для нашей страны и для всего мира"
Wikisib (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The point that many Americans are missing is that Russian, as a language, is tasked for expressing relations between people greatly more than English is, and it aims a lot of its metaphorical power there. They do not understand that "мы вас закопаем" ("we will dig you") means little more than "we are better than you" (a sentiment that can offend someone only if he has some excessive self-pride); what Gorbachov was going to explain were the causes why Khrusciov might have used this slangy expression rather than the reasons for him to do it; this also is what gets immediately understood by any Russian, but remains hidden for English-speaking people. If Americans claim they know Russian better than Russians themselves, that's entirely their fault... - 89.110.0.120 (talk) 18:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lets Make this straight 

message: It seems to me that "outlive" is the closest idiomatic translation of "закопаем" in context. "Bury" is significantly more grave. I wonder if we'll ever know who had supplied this translation and if there was ever a discussion.
Alex.K.NY (talk) 01:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  закопаем - outlast - outlive 

message: In the above Gorbachev's quotation Khrushchev said 'закопаем' (zakopaem) in place of 'похороним' (pohoronim), and russian wikipedia also states that the original word was 'zakopaem'. These words are synonyms in russian, and I believe that the quotation in the article should be changed to the latter form.
Also, here are my two cents to the interpretation of his speech: as you might know Khrushchev was not as highly educated as his fellow english and american ambassadors. In fact he had to earn his living instead of school since 14. Actually bad manners were kind of fashionable things amongst Party leaders at that time. So it looks natural to me that he sometimes couldn't see difference between diplomatic meetings and private conversation. In private conversation 'we will bury you' sounds more like profanity or swearing, than military threat. 
Offtopic: This is closely connected to the whole problem of perception of Cold War struggle of regimes in the West and USSR: to the westerners it was to the greater extent military struggle and the soviet POV on it was like natural competition. Internal perception. 213.131.7.83 (talk) 14:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Did he say Похороним or закопаем?

message: Could someone look at the transliteration? I'm pretty sure that Мы is not My. Of course, I could be wrong. In that case I would suggest the use of IPA.173.24.177.179 (talk) 00:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's correct. There's no "official" transliteration systems of Russian, but in the most (if not all) of them "ы" transliterated as "y". Also, "we" is "my" in many Slavic languages that using Latin script. 77.35.49.39 (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible transliteration error? 

message: What does this mean? Is there a better translation available?--Jack Upland (talk) 05:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who will dig whom in 

message: The last sentence of the history section has the line "...the image used by Khrushchev was inspired by the acute discussions among Soviet agrarian scientists in the 1930s..." with "agrarian scientists" linking to the article on modern agricultural science. This link does not seem very helpful, so I wonder whether there is a more appropriate target. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: actually, this is the correct link for the term. However one must double-check the Russian original. It is quite possibly that agronomists were actually mentioned.  - üser:Altenmann >t 05:45, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

text: У нас один спорный вопрос – земельный: кто кого закопает. (Обращено камериканцам, речь на пленуме ЦК КПСС 21 июня 1963 года.)
Interesting to verify against the source. - üser:Altenmann >t 05:45, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

text: “Как говорили красноармейцы во время гражданской войны: с белыми  у нас один спорный вопросs (...) это земельный вопрос (...) Кто кого закопает раньше. (...) У нас с капитализмом такой же вопрос» (речь на пленуме ЦК 21 июня 1965 г.). 
- üser:Altenmann >t 05:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

text: So, it can be it was a popular joke in these times. - üser:Altenmann >t 06:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to "agrarian scientists" 

message: A list of the NATO members that got up and walked out w/country would be helpful info. 104.169.37.99 (talk) 03:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of westerners that balked 

message: “We will outlast you” was clearly the best translation. It was removed. 67.83.101.225 (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It was removed in this edit by IP. I would support its restoration if reliable sources confirm it. Brandmeistertalk   21:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened with the best translation?