Jump to content

Talk:We will bury you

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.159.75.88 (talk) at 06:52, 4 December 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Old talk

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)

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)

Also, please read the welcome notice on your talk page carefully. I see you have already deleted it. If you want to edit here, you must understand how things work. It will take some time. Mikkalai 06:22, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

date

Saturday 17th or Sunday 18th? The two sources differ on the date. Bastie 20:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Trivia

I added a reference to Sting song "Russians". I am unsure as the best way to add this reference so I just added a new section. --Triskell 21:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut from article:

This quote is also used in the SpongeBob Squarepants episode Rock-a-Bye Bivalve. A worm comes out of an apple bringing greetings from "Worm World", and before it is fed to the scallop it says "We will bury you!"

Too trivial. - Jmabel | Talk 19:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have cut the trivia from the article. If someone wants to start an "in popular culture" article—possibly on Khrushchev in general, not on this one phrase—that would be a better place for these:

In an episode of the television show NewsRadio, Jimmy James removed his shoe and screamed "I will bury you" to open a negotiation with Beth about Profit Sharing.
In the computer game Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2, Soviet Vehicle units frequently use this quote when commanded to attack a target, presumably in its more aggressive sense.
Sting refers to this quote in his song entitled "Russians", in which he apparently uses the meaning of "we will destroy you" as a parallel with a (possible) quote from Ronald Reagan that says "we will protect you".
In the Spongebob episode "rock-a-bye bivalve" a worm is seen shouting "we will bury you!" before being eaten by the baby clam.

On another note about trivia, is the link to Mark Lucovsky really necessary? (Furthermore, is a page dedicated to him necessary also?) --anon.

Perception of the remark in the West

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)[reply]

Let's try not to rewrite history here, guys

He took his shoe off, and pounded the table vigorously while shouting 'we will bury you' during the height of the cold war. In what world is that even potentially not a threat? It is a dubious to even imply that there was some subtle underlying miscommunicated subtext involved.

Bottom line: It doesn't matter. Whether the statement was a threat (no matter how obviously), or a miscommunication (no matter how dubiously) neutral tone demands that we only report what he said, and the manner in which he said it. Our interpretations are based on conjecture and speculation.

" In 1956 a British prime minister was on the receiving end. It was a speech to the United Nations by Harold Macmillan that Soviet President Nikita Kruschev famously interrupted by beating his shoe against his desk before shouting to the US representatives "We will bury you".

Macmillan, in keeping with his reputation for unflappability, responded to the highly irregular shoe-banging with: "I shall have to have that translated!"

"

source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2368397.stm


DrAvery 14:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect. He did not say "we will bury you" while banging the shoe; they were separate incidents. Superm401 - Talk 18:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Context?

"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"."

This is belligerent either way. If someone told you "(we) will attend your funeral", how would you react? He basically told us that he would destroy our way of life and that our children would be slaves to collectivism. His exact words were: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you. Your children will live under communism". That is a belligerent statement. By the way, if anyone here ever visits his grave, toss a handfull of dirt onto it and ask the first person you see where the closest McDonald's is.70.172.198.145 08:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Mike Reason[reply]

"visits his grave": ROTLMAO `'Míkka 19:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Lets Make this straight

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)[reply]

Did he say Похороним or закопаем?

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)[reply]

Possible transliteration error?

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)[reply]

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)[reply]