Kerry Speech At NYU 9/20/04 - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-21-2004, 04:12 AM   #16
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
In the dark days of the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy sent former Secretary of State Dean Acheson to Europe to build support. Acheson explained the situation to French President de Gaulle. Then he offered to show him highly classified satellite photos, as proof. De Gaulle waved the photos away, saying: “The word of the President of the United States is good enough for me.”

How many world leaders have that same trust in America’s president, today?


Keep punching, John! Good one!
What Mr. Kerry, and most of the people who have not done their research into the Cuban Missile Crisis, is that Kennedy DID NOT stand the Russians down. It saddens me that the accuracy of this event would lead one to believe Kennedy was being strong. Kennedy SCREWED EUROPE and specifically Turkey. He struck a deal with the Russians that in order to get the missiles out of Cuba, he would wait a few months and remove the missiles from Turkey. The deal is public knowledge today. However, it was kept from the American public to give the impression that Kennedy had stood up to Communism.

From my viewpoint, Kennedy was a masterful politician. This improved his immage in the American public as being tough on communism. The perception and the reality, as in most cases are two different things. What is completely amazing to me, is that the American people are still pretty much in the dark as to how this went down, yet the documents, 1st hand accounts,ect are right there.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 04:22 AM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 02:48 AM
I recomend the brilliant documentary "The Fog of War" on Bob McNamara, it gives some insight into that adminstration from the SecDef.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 04:31 AM   #18
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 05:48 PM
yes, i agree with A_Wanderer, a great documentary
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 04:38 AM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Add another for "The Fog Of War"
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 07:58 AM   #20
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 11:48 AM
is that on DVD yet? I should have seen it by now, but haven't.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 07:59 AM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 02:48 AM
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...s=dvd&n=507846
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 09-21-2004, 04:52 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


What Mr. Kerry, and most of the people who have not done their research into the Cuban Missile Crisis, is that Kennedy DID NOT stand the Russians down. It saddens me that the accuracy of this event would lead one to believe Kennedy was being strong. Kennedy SCREWED EUROPE and specifically Turkey. He struck a deal with the Russians that in order to get the missiles out of Cuba, he would wait a few months and remove the missiles from Turkey. The deal is public knowledge today. However, it was kept from the American public to give the impression that Kennedy had stood up to Communism.

From my viewpoint, Kennedy was a masterful politician. This improved his immage in the American public as being tough on communism. The perception and the reality, as in most cases are two different things. What is completely amazing to me, is that the American people are still pretty much in the dark as to how this went down, yet the documents, 1st hand accounts,ect are right there.
The United States already had plans prior to the Cuban Missile crises to withdraw the specific missiles in Turkey. The United States had a very large bomber and missile command throughout Europe as well as positions in Asia and the Pacific that could easily strike numerous targets through out the Soviet Union. The missiles in Turkey were only a small part of the entire US strike package in Europe.

This is a huge contrast to the importance to the Soviet Union of having their missiles in Cuba, at that time. The Soviet placement of missiles in Cuba was the first time they had a "reliable" guaranteed way to strike the continental United States with nuclear weapons. The Soviet intercontinental bomber fleet was tiny and would be easy targets for US intercepters over such a long flight. The Soviet Union's nuclear Sub fleet was small at the time and unlikely to be successful against the large US and NATO Naval forces arrayed against it. The Soviets did not have bases near or close to the United States, like the United States had in Europe and Asia, all within close proximity to the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union at the time only had 4 ICBM's all of which had technical problems. Bottom line, without missiles in Cuba, the Soviets had no reliable way to hit the United States with Nuclear Weapons in 1962. Thus, the removal at the time for the Soviet Union was a major backdown, and the removal of missiles from Turkey essentially irrelevant when one looks at all the other missiles and bombers the United States had stationed all over Europe and Asia in close proximity to the Soviet Union, in 1962.

By 1965 though, the Soviet Union had finally developed a strong and growing ICBM force. Because of the experience of the 1950s and early 1960s when Bombers and Submarines were found to be poor ways to reliably deliver nuclear weapons to the USA because of the USA's ability to intercept that route of delivery, the Soviets would overwhelmingly invest most of their money for Strategic Forces, into ICBM's which could hit the United States from the USSR in as little as 30 minutes, with little or no chance of interception during that time period. Over 70% of the Soviet Union's Strategic Nuclear Warheads were placed on ICBM's during the the next 25 years of the Cold War. In addition, the Soviet Bomber and Submarine fleets would grow larger and be more capable, but in the 1950s and early 1960s, they were both to small(in numbers) and vulnerable to interception.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com