lessons of history

[billvon 2,434]

An evil madman, bent on the destruction of the US and reeling from the US's last attack, looks like he's about to get nuclear weapons. We can't allow this to happen, of course, and our president considers his options. Invade? Use sanctions, blockades and inspections to prevent him from getting nuclear weapons? Start off a battle that could turn into World War III?

I'm not talking about Iraq, I'm talking about an event that happened almost exactly 40 years ago today. The USSR was going to move nuclear weapons into Cuba. Cuba welcomed them; they were still reeling from the Bay of Pigs invasion, and wanted the deterrence that Soviet nuclear weapons would provide. The USSR did not yet have ICBM's that could reach the US, but did have IRBM's that would reach the US from Cuba.

JFK was president at the time. Several of his advisors were suggesting that an invasion of Cuba, and removal of Communist-supporter Fidel Castro, was the only way to ensure the safety of the US. (For you young-uns, communist back then had the same connotations that terrorist has today.) JFK considered it and rejected it - the risk of war was too high, and he did not want to sacrifice american lives. Besides, the problem was not Fidel Castro; he was a tinpot dictator, and the world was full of them. The problem was nuclear weapons in evil hands.

His solution was inspection (U-2's were flying over Cuba every 2 hours) and a naval blockade. He was also prepared to compromise with Khrushchev, and gave him a guarantee that the US would not invade Cuba if they backed down. It worked; the USSR backed down, Cuba dismantled their weapons, and today Castro engages in nothing more evil than relentlessly outliving all his enemies.

Forty years ago, JFK prevented Cuba from obtaining nuclear weapons while at the same time avoiding a conflict that could well have brought on World War III. I hope our modern leaders can summon up the same sort of wisdom, flexibility and good judgement to confront the enemies we now face.

(And that's my last political thread for the week, I promise.)

[MarkM 0]

Wasn't there something about us putting nukes in Turkey which also sparked this whole thing up?

[billvon 2,434]

>Wasn't there something about us putting nukes in Turkey which also
>sparked this whole thing up?

Sorta. Khrushchev demanded that we remove our missiles in Turkey before he'd remove the Cuban missiles, but we ignored that part of his demand and got away with it.

[freeflir29 0]

Kinda hard to put a naval blockade around Iraq. We have done just that in the gulf but it doesn't do a whole lot of good.

[billvon 2,434]

>Kinda hard to put a naval blockade around Iraq.

Purely naval blockades only work against islands. But I suspect you knew that. We have some good minds in the military and some good diplomats in the administration - I am sure that, if we put our minds to it (and did some diplomacy with Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt and Turkey) we could implement a pretty good blockade, of which the navy would only play a part.

[nws01 0]

Boobies!

[algboy 0]

"My dear Colette, don't worry," Lantos reportedly told Colette Avital, a member of Israeli Knesset who was visiting Washington with a delegation of the Peace Coalition. "You won't have any problem with Saddam. We'll be rid of the bastard soon enough. And in his place we'll install a pro-Western dictator, who will be good for us and good for you."
-- U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, D-California as reported in the Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz

“Keep your elbow up!"

[billvon 2,434]

>Boobies!

I keep telling you guys, tonight at Kahuna's . . .

[Deuce 1]

OK, I'll give this a try.

The Communit bloc was "the main enemy" but unlike terrorists, they wore uniforms. The US fought proxy wars with the Soviets in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan, but neither side ever put on civilian clothes to murder civilians of the other in anything approaching the 9/11 attack.

[Enrique 0]

(For you young-uns, communist back then had the same connotations that terrorist has today.) ***

I didn't know that Bill. Did it have that connotation with the rest of the world, or only with the U.S.?

[algboy 0]

The U.S. Army's School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia (http://www.soaw.org/index.html) has trained terrorists from Latin America for 55 years and the difference between terrorist and freedom fighter throughout the world is largely in the eye of the beholder

“Keep your elbow up!"

[jtval 0]

Quote

The U.S. Army's School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia (http://www.soaw.org/index.html) has trained terrorists from Latin America for 55 years and the difference between terrorist and freedom fighter throughout the world is largely in the eye of the beholder

ouch,

My photos

My Videos

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

has trained terrorists from Latin America for 55 years

Nice propaganda.....I suppose I'm a terrorist then too? I have been trained by the US Army. Do you think I'm a terrorist?

[algboy 0]

"Nice propaganda.....I suppose I'm a terrorist then too? I have been trained by the US Army. Do you think I'm a terrorist?"
Reminds me of the schoolboy taunt that always ended with "You calling me a liar?"
Answer: I don't know--who were you shooting at--and why?
Propaganda--like "terrorism"--is also in the eye of the beholder, nyet? We used to laugh at Pravda--yet sit hypnotized by CNN. Go figure.

"When the mass media in some foreign countries serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of their government, the result is ludicrous propaganda. When the mass media in our country serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of the U.S. government, the result is responsible journalism."
-- Normon Solomon

“Keep your elbow up!"

[nathaniel 0]

OK, I'll bite.

There's no more USSR...in order to have a world war, or a detente that avoids a world war, you need to have more than one superpower.

consequence #1: Despite your (and my) worst post-9/11 paranoid delusions, there aren't too many things that countries and factions in the Middle East can do to the US. (or most other regions, for that matter, excepting China and Russia...) The USSR tried its best for decades, and they were certainly more disciplined than this imaginary "middle-eastern bloc". Blowing up a couple buildings is dramatic, but ultimately it backfires for the same reason, imho. Think infrastructure. Releasing smallpox would be dramatic too, but it's a bad idea for terrorists for the same reason it was for the USSR: after it got out it would hurt smaller, weaker entities like the Taliban far worse than the US (which group of people is best prepared to deal with worldwide outbreak?).

consequence #2: there's no-one to reach a detente with. It is clear to me that terrorists will irritate the US if it nukes Iraq or not. Even if Bush had a hotline direct to Mullah Omar, do you think his word is worth spit? Even if there was a single entity Terrorists, Inc that we were up against, a relativist approach in this case is a one-way street that would not work.

Nathaniel

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[seedy 0]

Quote

We used to laugh at Pravda--yet sit hypnotized by CNN

I would prefer that when you mean "you" sit hypnotized that you wouldn't include those of us who don't.

I intend to live forever -- so far, so good.

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

I would prefer that when you mean "you" sit hypnotized that you wouldn't include those of us who don't.

Yeah...I'm edgeyumacated and can make my own decisions. In fact...I have some pretty unique life experiences that factor into drawing those conclusions. BTW...I won't in any way defend the track record of students from SOA. It's sad I know. I just don't think the fact that the US Army trained them has ANYTHING to do with THEM committing horrible human rights violations. Now...maybe the fact that the US supported those countries in the first place...that's another story. We tend to pick the lesser of two evils. Sometimes that isn't saying much. That whole thing has been a lose/lose situation and we aren't done yet.......

[billvon 2,434]

>The US fought proxy wars with the Soviets in Korea, Vietnam, and
> Afghanistan, but neither side ever put on civilian clothes to murder
> civilians of the other in anything approaching the 9/11 attack.

While I agree, I don't think the 60,000 americans who died there were any happier that their killers were wearing uniforms (and many of them were not anyway.) We lost some 3000 people on 9/11, and that's bad, but in terms of sheer numbers of deaths, it's hard to compare that to Vietnam (60,000 Americans, 700,000 Viet Cong and N. Vietnamese.)

[billvon 2,434]

>I didn't know that Bill. Did it have that connotation with the rest of
> the world, or only with the U.S.?

Primarily US. There was a time when even the suspicion of being part of a communist (or socialist) organization was enough to get you fired, blacklisted, even put in jail. Lucille Ball was once branded a communist (she registered as one once to cause a stir) and was almost ruined by the charge.

Do a google search on McCarthyism. There are some eerie parallels between the war on communism and the war on terrorism.