Cuban Missle Crisis

[GWF]

The Missle Crisis of '62 is believed to be won by the U$A, but this isn't so.

Chroetsov said to Kennedy that he would move the nukes out of Cuba if Kennedy removed the missles out of Turkey, Kennedy did this, but wanted that it would be kept secret that the moved the missle out of Turkey. So America didn't want to loose face, but they knew after that that the weren't the most powerful nation on earth.

[Subcomandante Marcos]

Actually there is a movie bout th missile crisis,I dont remember the name right now but it is really good, it shows everything objectibly.

Lets not forget that J. F. Keneddy was pressed by the Army to take severe actions toward Cuba, and that is why the CIA killed him, he was not 'USAnian' enough.

Also, the missiles in Turkey were not operational, that the US public does not know this is another thing

Le Monde diplomatique

[tresa909]

Originally posted by Subcomandante [email protected] 24 2003, 05:17 PM
Actually there is a movie bout th missile crisis,I dont remember the name right now but it is really good, it shows everything objectibly.

Lets not forget that J. F. Keneddy was pressed by the Army to take severe actions toward Cuba, and that is why the CIA killed him, he was not 'USAnian' enough.

Also, the missiles in Turkey were not operational, that the US public does not know this is another thing

Le Monde diplomatique
subcommander, then what is the big deal if the missiles were removed?

i don't agree that there was a big conspiracy plot to kill the president. considering the background of the family they had drama in their lives like every family. the fact that they are famous makes it easier for the rest of the world to exploit when something does go wrong. personally, i feel it was a family disagreement.

in another book i read, the germans say it was the communists who killed kennedy. i don't really want to say who i think had him killed because it's too personal. think about it though, some families have a lot of drama going on. just my silly opinion anyway. i have a two different books on the issue of kennedy which i have not read yet and i probably won't until i finish with the mexican revolution.

adelante!

[trudeaumania]

[QUOTE=Subcomandante Marcos,Aug 24 2003, 05:17 PM]Actually there is a movie bout th missile crisis,I dont remember the name right now but it is really good, it shows everything objectibly.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The movie you may be talking about? '13 Days. ' Kevin Costner has a role in it.

[Urban Rubble]

tresa909:

"then what is the big deal if the missiles were removed? "

Because they didn't want to seem weak bu backing down and taking the missles out. This was the Cold War, shit like that meant ALOT.

"i don't agree that there was a big conspiracy plot to kill the president"

Then you have obviously never studied the subject. It is basically common knowledge that there was a conspiracy to kill the president. They have proved (in many different ways) that it would have been impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to have made that shot, or acted alone.

There was a conspiracy, that is a fact. And judging by the Warren Report, it's almost unquestionable that the U.S government at least new about it, if not ordered it.

"personally, i feel it was a family disagreement. "

You think JFK was killed over a family disagreement ? Wow, stunning. No, you are wrong.

"in another book i read, the germans say it was the communists who killed kennedy."

No, they had no real reason to. Kennedy was the most commie friendly U.S president ever. They had nothing to gain by killing him. Some have speculated that Castro may have had a hand in it, but that has been disproven.

[tresa909]

okay, i am not going to argue especially because i have not studied the warren report. i just don't buy into conspiracy that is all.

i am going to check out the movie...for now.

thanks

[Urban Rubble]

"i just don't buy into conspiracy that is all. "

What the hell ? Have read anything AT ALL about the assassination of JFK ? The theory that Oswald acted alone ( or even fired a shot) has been completely disproven. It is no longer a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy.

I'll post a few of the many example.

Oswald was spotted on the bottom floor of the hotel seconds after the shots were fired. This means that he fired the shots, took apart his rifle, packed it in it's case, and ran down 6 flights of stairs in about a minute. The witness also stated that he was not breathing hard at all.

If Oswald did indeed fire the shots, he would have been the biggest moron alive. The position the limo was in when the shots were fired would have been the worst possible spot to shoot from. He would have had to wait until the motorcade passed a FAR easier spot to shoot at.

They had a proffessional sniper try to duplicate Oswald's shots, he couldn't do it.

At least 30 witnesses said that they heard a shot come from "the grassy nole". Some said they saw the shot, some said they just heard it. The owner of the lot that the nole was next to saw 2 men in suits running from the exact spot that the shots were said to have come from.

These are jsut a few small examples, there are ALOT more. These are simply the least complicated. The most famous shot of Oswald (the one with him and the gun) has been proven as doctored, presumeably to frame him. Also, there was (faked) pictures placing him at the Soviet embassy in an effort to paint him as a Soviet lackey.

[Palmares]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't JFK want to bomb Cuba? I read (and watched a doco) that he was almost going to 'push the button', but was recommended by advisors that there was a better way. This was a while ago though.

I agree that Harvey Lee Ozwald could not have killed JFK, but I like to get into that conspiracy theory stuff too much. But I think the 'magic bullet' theory is pretty damn funny.

Most of the cospiracy theories I have heard are linked to secret societies. :blink:

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by Urban [email protected] 24 2003, 05:21 PM

No, they had no real reason to. Kennedy was the most commie friendly U.S president ever. They had nothing to gain by killing him. Some have speculated that Castro may have had a hand in it, but that has been disproven.
JFK was strongly anti-communist. I don't know what gives you the idea that he was commie friendly.

[GWF]

JFK was killed by the CIA according to some theories (this could be very true). But Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't have killed him alone, I can't remember the exact number of bullits that hit him, but it never could be fired by one shooter.

the movie 'JFK' is about this theory.

[FistFullOfSteel]

CIA IS ALWYAS INVOLVED IN THINGS

[Comrade Raz]

The only reason Lee Harvey Oswald was convicted was cause it was the simple thing for the government to do. They did not want to get into a deep case as they may have had the blame placed on them. He was convicted cause he was in the area. Simple as that.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 25 2003, 02:54 PM
The only reason Lee Harvey Oswald was convicted was cause it was the simple thing for the government to do. They did not want to get into a deep case as they may have had the blame placed on them. He was convicted cause he was in the area. Simple as that.
Lee harvey Oswold was not convicted, he was assasinated by Jack Rubey befor he got to trial.

As for the missile crisis i think it is petty and foolish to discuss who was the "winner". I rather think that it was the world who won, a nuclear war has no winners. Either they both were winners or neither of them.

Thats my view on it anyhow.

[ComradeJunichi]

I think AK 47 said it well. In the long run, the world won for the absence of a nuclear war.

[GWF]

True, If it lasted a little longer we wouldn't be here right now.

[Saint-Just]

The Soviet Union and U.S. could have launched nuclear missiles at any time from numerouslocations around the world. They could have launched and impacted a full scale nuclear attack on each other in a matter of hours. The presence of nuclear missiles in Cuba and Turkey was more of a provocative act that a tactical advantagethat if they wanted they could be decimate enemy cities within a far shorter time space.

Having said this, there is leeway to the idea that missiles in Cuba was a tactical advantage: There was a theory that a nuclear war could be won. Although there were likely to be casualties on one's own side if one were to destroy enough enemy cities and military installations, before one's own forces were neutralised, the enemy realising that their struggle was futile would simply 'give up' in respect for preserving human life rather than fight to the bitter end killing as many as possible. In addition to this, one may also win by exhausting the enemies stock of nuclear projectiles. It was suggested one of the most important strikes from the USSR would be on Colorado Springs.

During the cold war an idea was developed by which a nuclear war could be fought without the destruction of most of the human race. This was that the 'theatre of war' would be located in Europe. Instead of striking each other the USSR and U.S. would only hit targets in Europe and from that would emerge a victor.

The first post in this thread was correct in saying there was a belief in the U.S. that they 'won' the Cuban missile crisis due to them having the threat of superior military power. This isn't the case at all.

One of the U.S. solutions to the crisis was that they would mount an attack on Cuba and following this they would not retaliate after the assumed Soviet retaliation of an attack on Turkey. Simply, both nuclear sites in Cuba and Turkey would have been destroyed and so the crisis would end.

In the end, a deal was made that they would both remove their missiles from Cuba and Turkey.

[suffianr]

During the cold war an idea was developed by which a nuclear war could be fought without the destruction of most of the human race. This was that the 'theatre of war' would be located in Europe. Instead of striking each other the USSR and U.S. would only hit targets in Europe and from that would emerge a victor.

This is the basis of Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising, in which the Soviets challenge Nato to a land battle throughout Germany, Iceland and the Atlantic. Total propaganda. Would you take a dump in your own backyard? :lol:

[Urban Rubble]

"JFK was strongly anti-communist. I don't know what gives you the idea that he was commie friendly. "

I didn't say he was commie friendly, I said he was the most commie friendly U.S president. I admit, that isn't saying much. Before his death he was pushing to get ALL U.S troops out of Vietnam by 1965. He was the sole reason that Cuba defeated us at the Bay of Pigs (by not sending air support). He was at least somewhat trying to work with the Soviets. I had other reasons that seem to be escaping me at the moment.

"He was convicted cause he was in the area"

No. Oswald was blamed because he was a Patsy. They needed to set it up so SOMEONE got blamed. Oswald was that someone.

"Either they both were winners or neither of them"

Exactly. It was a draw.




There was a conspiracy involved in the JFK assassination, that is a FACT.

[Severian]

The problem with the Costner movie is that it almost erases Cuba from the missile crisis. Actually, that a pretty common problem with a lot of writing about it, too.

There's a recent book by a Cuban historian who did a lot of research, got the relevant declassifed documents from different countries, and who presents the often-left-out Cuban aspect of the story. I.E. what was happening in Cuba before, during, after all this?

The book's called October 1962 and the author is Tomas Diez Acosta.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

I would just like to say that, to an extent, the entire human race won the Cuban Missile Crisis. I say this because the nutjob hawks in the Kennedy administration were not allowed to start nuclear war with the USSR. Consequently, the human race is not yet extinct. That makes me happy.