http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/110808.pdf?v...
"All these facts clearly show that their armed forces are designed to play a decisive role in the realization of plans to establish American world domination."
If viewed slantwise, this has a nugget of truth, i.e., the U.S. is establishing forward military bases partly to protect free trade and enable capitalism.
But these bases proved to be almost entirely defensive and were not really used for "world domination" in the sense meant by the Soviet ambassador.
That being said, from the Soviet perspective, the United States -- during "peace time", had rapidly increased military spending and presence around the world. This only goes in to feed the "neurotic" world view that Kennan cited in his article.
"At bottom of Kremlin's neurotic view of world affairs is traditional and instinctive Russian sense of insecurity. Originally, this was insecurity of a peaceful agricultural people trying to live on vast exposed plain in neighborhood of fierce nomadic peoples. To this was added, as Russia came into contact with economically advanced West, fear of more competent, more powerful, more highly organized societies in that area. But this latter type of insecurity was one which afflicted rather Russian rulers than Russian people; for Russian rulers have invariably sensed that their rule was relatively archaic in form fragile and artificial in its psychological foundation, unable to stand comparison or contact with political systems of Western countries. For this reason they have always feared foreign penetration, feared direct contact between Western world and their own, feared what would happen if Russians learned truth about world without or if foreigners learned truth about world within. And they have learned to seek security only in patient but deadly struggle for total destruction of rival power, never in compacts and compromises with it."
One striking thing to me there is the consistent use of "democratic" and "democratization" to refer to governments that the U.S. referred to as "communist". (For example, Novikov says that an important outcome of the Soviet military role in Eastern Europe was the creation of democratic regimes friendly to the USSR, and complains that the U.S. will not agree to the democratization of postwar Germany.)
"As a result of their reorganization on democratic principles, in such former enemy countries as Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, and Romania regimes have been created which have set themselves the task of strengthening and maintaining friendly relations with the Soviet Union. In the Slavic countries - Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia - liberated by the Red Army or with its help, democratic regimes have also been created and are consolidating which maintain relations with the Soviet Union on the basis of friendship and mutual aid agreements."
There were solid reasons those "former enemies" were enemies.
The idea was that most people in capitalist countries were oppressed by the economic system, and that in the people's democracies they finally had a chance to have a say in how the country was governed, through workers' councils, a Party that represented them, and various forms of collective rule.
The difference was that one is real democracy, and the other a sham. But notice how even the most authoritarian states go to great lengths to pretend they have broad social support. Everyone loves democracy!