“The ‘winner’ complex - as opposed to the Soviet/Russian “loser complex” that so threatened the world with nuclear war between 1946 and 1989 and now sells nuclear and weapon technology to Iran?  When I see terrorists brandishing weapons and trying to destabilize governments, I don’t see the terrorists raising M-16s over their heads.  I see them raising AK-47s.  In fact, in some African countries, “Kalash” (from Kalashnikov) is a slang term for young man.

Gorbechev, the Soviet Union failed and it’s failure destabilized eastern Europe, Russia, and the Middle East for generations.  Remember, when we went to war with Iraq in the first and second gulf wars, Iraq was armed with Soviet equipment - T-72 tanks and Mig aircraft.  Don’t talk to us about the US destabilizing the world.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Mikhail who?

I don’t know what is funnier.  That he believes this, or that your typical university academic will take this seriously.

Someone might wish to remind Mr. Gorbachev that he was the last dictator of an empire which spent generations murdering its own citizens and oppressing other nations (Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Poland, Germany, Georgia, Armenia, Afghanistan, Croatia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, to name a few.) His Empire’s collapse plunged half of Europe and a third of Asia into near anarchy.

Someone might want to remind Russia that they need to do a little more soul searching before they start accusing others and rebuilding their “glorious” past. Did anyone hear the NPR special today about the new Russian youth camps?

“The U.S. is always anxious to win.”

and he is anxious to stay in the limelight…..

Ward Churchill will pick this up right away!

Perhaps what we should be doing, rather than pointing out the sins of others, is take a long hard look at our own sins and see what we can do to overcome them.

7.  Mike, I agree with you.  Russia was doing very very bad, while the U.S. was doing very very good, say from 1920 to 2000.  Now, Russia may be doing a tiny bit better while the U.S. is doing good.  We should look into the mirror and ask where did our “very very” go?  Why will a country like ours say: “we will uphold the Geneva Convention, except in those cases where it does not serve our purposes.”?  General P. X. Kelly has just read the President the riot act on this.  That and all else associated with his adventures in the Middle East are likely to be open to revision with a new face in the W.H.  Perhaps, even an independent such as Mr. Bloomberg?

If the contests under discussion were Chess or Checkers, I could agree with Mr. Loser, but as they are more of an “either you die or I die” kind of thing, I much prefer winning.

Don

Only a supreme, big time loser could be dumb enough to
say something like this.

Father John Whiteford has posted a link to an interview with Alexander Solzhenitsyn from Der Spiegel which a number of those making comments on this thread might read with some profit.

Among other things he says, “But let us be clear that it was Gorbachev, and not Yeltsin, as is now widely being claimed, who first gave freedom of speech and movement to the citizens of our country.”  See http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/

Father Dean A. Einerson+
Rhinelander, Wisconsin

In your mocking Mr. Gorbachev and branding him as a “loser”, “dumb”, “dictator”, etc. please remember that he risked his life and nearly lost it to bring about the openness “glasnost” which enabled patriots throughout Eastern Europe to move toward independence and democracy without the fear of Soviet tanks and troops restoring their draconian hegemony.

I worked against the Soviets for more than 20 years and continue to rejoice at their downfall. I’ve met Mikhail Sergeyevich on several occasions and can understand his current perspective. I believe it incorrect the same as I believe the recent pronouncements of Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu are wrong. That in no way diminishes their legacy among the giants of the 20th century—men who changed nations with a minimum of bloodshed and carnage.

Respectfully,
Bob Livingston