thirteen days

[t68]

Hi guys

I have been watching the movie thirteen days about the cuban missile crisses and their was one aspect in it as jfk was contemplating taking out the missiles and he ask genral le may what would happen when they did as soviet pers would be kia, and then would move against berlin then that would bring in nato and then what ? GEN LE MEY he said the only option they had then was the one they could not make.

My question is do you think Gen Le May was right and do you think that moscow would have gone into berlin and resorted to using nukes ?

Did JFK make the correct desion to offer a back room deal and remove the missiles from turkey ?

Do you think that buy removing the missiles from turkey made JFK look soft and the soviets would then use this to make more demands at diffrent time and place?


Can i have your thoughts on this as this was a real world event or do you think JFK should have done anything diffrent and how do you think it would have Changed the outcome at the time.


REGARDS

TOM

 

[nevidimka]

I also watched a series on History channel regarding the cuban missile crisis. I personally dont think the Soviets did anything wrong, compared to what the Americans did. The Soviets placed the missiles in responce to US stationing missiles in Turkey. But the US seem to overreact when there is a Nuclear missile at its doorstep. Had the Soviets reacted in the same way, they would have invaded Turkey or taken out those missiles in Turkey wouldnt they?

Also an interesting fact that they documented was about the Russian submarines in America during the crisis, and unknown to the Americans those subs carried Nuclear missiles. The Americans ships actually dropped grenades below to identify the silent russian submarines. few times it would hit the hull of the submarines n explode and damage the subs a little. That can be construed as an attack on the Soviet Union. What is 1 of those submarine captains decided to launch his nuclear weapons fearing that he was attacked? Unimaginable...

Also the current situation with missiles in Poland is smelling like the cuban missile crisis. What if the russian's decide to make the same decisions Kennedy took, by taking out those missile sites in a preemptive strike?
That would mean that russia just attacked a NATO member country. But i suspect that the whole of NATO would go to war agaisnt Russia if that happens.

btw, i've divulged in some possible senarios happening. Its not ment to create any flame war or anything.

 

[SABRE]

Hi guys

I have been watching the movie thirteen days about the cuban missile crisses and their was one aspect in it as jfk was contemplating taking out the missiles and he ask genral le may what would happen when they did as soviet pers would be kia, and then would move against berlin then that would bring in nato and then what ? GEN LE MEY he said the only option they had then was the one they could not make.

1st of all correct the way you write your posts. Try to write in a way you are writing some sort of an article.

There are several problems with 13 Days. i.e.

1. Its a movie
2. Its a movie made in American so only shows American side of the story.

My question is do you think Gen Le May was right and do you think that moscow would have gone into berlin and resorted to using nukes ?

By all accounts (mostly by the major think tanks present in the Presidential Meetings during CMC) all the Generals were wrong. If it hadnt been for the clever Buearacratic minds (such as Robet McNamara & Robert Kennedy) the Generals would have led to a war - in fact a nuclear war.

There is little proof that USSR was even interested in occupying the Western Europe. All its actions towards the Western Europe in fact seem to be "reactions" to the actions taken by the West. I.e: they established Warsaw Pact (1955) in counter of the Nato (1949).

In other importent aspect is the Russian/Soviet Strategic Culture. They did have history of tussle with Britain during the 1st great game but that was in Afghanistan region rather than in Europe. As for rest they only seemed to have had interest in Poland.

There interest in Germany perhaps starts with Hitler's invassion of Poland & than the USSR. Soviets perhaps occupied the East Berlin/Germany to boost the moral of its soldiers who during much of the 2nd WW were down & defeated. It was only in the end did they succeed in defeating Germans. Plus East Germany was a symbol of victory which boosted their ego as well.

Were they interested in entire Germany I think they wouldn't have put "the wall" there in the 1st place.

Also during CMC, Nato was effective & there were American nuclear weapons in Greece & Turkey. While the British & French had their own. This would have definitly deterred Soviets from stepping into West Germany.

Hence I do not believe that USSR would have crossed the lines in Europe.

Did JFK make the correct desion to offer a back room deal and remove the missiles from turkey ?

There were very little options. JFK called the meeting, the Cheif of the Air Force said that the air force can carry out ground attacks & get these missiles once & for all & the stroy would end once & for all. JFK asked him whether 'if there was a chance that at least 2 missiles would survive the attack" & the answer was "YES". On that JFK said he cant risk Washington & New York on that. Hence the diplomacy was opted for.

Do you think that buy removing the missiles from turkey made JFK look soft and the soviets would then use this to make more demands at diffrent time and place?

He always wanted to show himself as a good guy so what he did certainly helped his image. But in reality what options did he have? Either War (which would definitly have turned into nuclear war) or diplomacy. He chose the 2nd as any responsible person would have.

Soviets had no demands other than perhaps the removal of the missiles & that Washington would not bother Hawana. In fact in my personal opinion Soviets achieved their goal. They had been in militarily check in Europe, Asia & Pacific by US allies. They were in reach of American nuclear Missile range (in Turkey & Greece). Hence their main strategic objective was to get out of the web & deploying nuclear weapons in Cuba made them force-feed the Americans their own bitter Medicine.

 

[SABRE]

The Soviets placed the missiles in responce to US stationing missiles in Turkey. But the US seem to overreact when there is a Nuclear missile at its doorstep. Had the Soviets reacted in the same way, they would have invaded Turkey or taken out those missiles in Turkey wouldnt they?

That wasn't an over-reaction by all means. In fact it was a proper one. Had US attacked Cuba that would have been an over-reaction.

Soviets wouldn't have over-reacted & attacked Turkey. They were pehaps facing the same dilema as the Americans came to face during the CMC.

If they had invaded or attacked Turkey they would have activated NATO. & what if couple of or even a single missile survived in Turkey? Soveits knew where it would go. Hence they were under creduble deterrence.

Also an interesting fact that they documented was about the Russian submarines in America during the crisis, and unknown to the Americans those subs carried Nuclear missiles. The Americans ships actually dropped grenades below to identify the silent russian submarines. few times it would hit the hull of the submarines n explode and damage the subs a little. That can be construed as an attack on the Soviet Union. What is 1 of those submarine captains decided to launch his nuclear weapons fearing that he was attacked? Unimaginable...

Yes, a true incident (I read in Noam Chomsky's book about it) .. anyways; but the Captain in the end refrained from using Nuclear weapons. This perhaps proves that Soveits were more into threatening/containing/deterring than into actual war.

Also the current situation with missiles in Poland is smelling like the cuban missile crisis. What if the russian's decide to make the same decisions Kennedy took, by taking out those missile sites in a preemptive strike?
That would mean that russia just attacked a NATO member country. But i suspect that the whole of NATO would go to war agaisnt Russia if that happens.

The scenario is quite different. Americans are deployed Missile Defence System rather than nuclear weapons while Russia already reacted to it by re-activating its Strategic Bomber fleet.

What ever the reaction I don't think Russia would choose attack on another country in Europe.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yes, a true incident (I read in Noam Chomsky's book about it)

If you read it in a book by Noam Chomsky, then he plagiarised it. It was originally sourced in interviews done by Polmar just after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I know that Noam Chomsky likes to take credit for a few things outside his purvue - but he's definitely not the source for this.

-------------------------------------------------

13 Days is a film, not a documentary

It turns out that the Cubans did have nukes already tipped and armed - thats only come out in the last few years. Apparently Haigh and castro had an interview where Castro admitted that if the russians hadn't handcuffed him politically, he was quite prepared to launch.

The Jupiters were never the reason for the trigger of this event, they were already obsolete and were offered as part of an exit strategy for Kruschev to save face. They were already at the tertiary stages of a pulldown, so removing them was symbolic rather than credible.

 

[SABRE]

If you read it in a book by Noam Chomsky, then he plagiarised it. It was originally sourced in interviews done by Polmar just after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I know that Noam Chomsky likes to take credit for a few things outside his purvue - but he's definitely not the source for this.

No he is not ... he just mentioned the incident & I think he also gave the source.

The book is "FAILED STATE" & the mention of the incident is in 1st chapter. I haven't come across this thing in any other book except for FAILED STATE so I mentioned Noam Chomsky.

13 Days is a film, not a documentary

It turns out that the Cubans did have nukes already tipped and armed - thats only come out in the last few years. Apparently Haigh and castro had an interview where Castro admitted that if the russians hadn't handcuffed him politically, he was quite prepared to launch.

The Jupiters were never the reason for the trigger of this event, they were already obsolete and were offered as part of an exit strategy for Kruschev to save face. They were already at the tertiary stages of a pulldown, so removing them was symbolic rather than credible.

Oh ... I did forget that Jupiters were obsolete. Even mentioned in the film & other sources. Much of my theory changes with this.

Any credible source mentioning that Soviets knew about Jupiters?

 

[gf0012-aust]

No he is not ... he just mentioned the incident & I think he also gave the source.

The book is "FAILED STATE" & the mention of the incident is in 1st chapter. I haven't come across this thing in any other book except for FAILED STATE so I mentioned Noam Chomsky./quote]

I hope he gives the proper attributions, Chomsky has a tendency to be very naughty in some of his works.

Any credible source mentioning that Soviets knew about Jupiters?

Polmar interviewed Russian commanders. IIRC it was called "Red Tide Rising"

That part of my library is packed away again as I'm in the middle of another uplift.

 

[SABRE]

I hope he gives the proper attributions, Chomsky has a tendency to be very naughty in some of his works.

I'll check out the book again tomorrow & see if he has mentioned the source or not. As for Noam Chomsky he seems to be very naughty in "all" of his work. But its always fun to read. Does give good arguments & criticism.

Polmar interviewed Russian commanders. IIRC it was called "Red Tide Rising"

That part of my library is packed away again as I'm in the middle of another uplift.

Yeah but does Polmar say that the Soviets knew about Jupiters being obsolete?

Your library is always packed away
I'll look for the book my self.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yeah but does Polmar say that the Soviets knew about Jupiters being obsolete?

Yes, the Politburo certainly knew

Your library is always packed away
I'll look for the book my self.

Thats because my job stresses "flexibility and mobility".

If not, I'll be back at my house in mid-December

 

[SABRE]

Yes, the Politburo certainly knew

Ok .. than thats confirmed. Thanks. Now I have to review what I mentioned above.

Thats because my job stresses "flexibility and mobility".

If not, I'll be back at my house in mid-December

I hope I get such a job. I wana be on the run all the time. Anyways, Mid-December is buys time for me. I'll look for the book in the university's central library.

 

[nevidimka]

I'm sorry i'm kinda lost on the Jupiter that u guys are mentioning here.

Also a few facts on Castro, again from History channel. He was not in favour of the missile deployment in cuba, rather it was his brother raul, and che guevera who convinced him that it was the right decision to get the soiets o base thier missiles in Cuba.

Why i termed american reaction as overreaction was becoz the Soviets didnt immediately prepare thier military n air force to launch attacks on the missile site in turkey n greece when they found out about it. The Cuba;s situation was an opportunity that fell in thier lap, that they used to address the turkey issue.

However the minute America knew about the the Cuban situation, they started a naval blockade( which was too late), and prepared thier air force n military for a strike at the missiles locations awaiting a word from Kennedy.

But in the end common sence prevailed n He took the diplomatic route.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I'm sorry i'm kinda lost on the Jupiter that u guys are mentioning here.

Also a few facts on Castro, again from History channel. He was not in favour of the missile deployment in cuba, rather it was his brother raul, and che guevera who convinced him that it was the right decision to get the soiets o base thier missiles in Cuba.

The interview with castro was in the last few months. having watched the History Channel in the past, and having seen some of their errors, I'd rate them as reliable a source as Wiki

Why i termed american reaction as overreaction was becoz the Soviets didnt immediately prepare thier military n air force to launch attacks on the missile site in turkey n greece when they found out about it. The Cuba;s situation was an opportunity that fell in thier lap, that they used to address the turkey issue.

the american reaction had nothing to do with any soviet move against greece and turkey. the jupiters in turkey were offered as a bargaining chip later - they were not even in the equation at the opening stages. they were a tame offer as well as they were due to be decommissioned in 1963 anyway. It was designed to ensure that Kruschev didn't lose face as much as the americans didn't lose face.

Cuba never fell into their lap - Kruschev was livid at some of Castros behaviour as it threatened the position of the russians and made them look as though they couldn't control their client states.

However the minute America knew about the the Cuban situation, they started a naval blockade( which was too late), and prepared thier air force n military for a strike at the missiles locations awaiting a word from Kennedy.

no, the americans actually tailed all 5 conventional subs from their northern ports - that was a journey of some weeks - this was prior to the blockade taking effect. the naval blockade was designed to demonstrate intent - they already knew that they couldn't stop all vessels, the USN had advised the Executive that there would be leakage.

The ASW teams had orders to kill the subs if they made any moves to launch weapons.

But in the end common sence prevailed n He took the diplomatic route.

it wasn't one sided. the russians were just as fearful and actually had a better idea of the fact that US outnumbered them at a nuke weapons level of almost 5:1

If you look at the history of premier russian defectors such as Oleg Gordievsky, Vitaly Yurchenko, [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yuri Nosenko, Ion Mihai Pacepa, Oleg Penkovskiy, you'll see a bit more accurate representation of the soviet side of the story. Even Putin (who is also "ex" KBG) has made references to the relationship between their behaviour during the Cuban Crisis and the US proposals for a missile shield in Romania and Poland. He makes it very clear that the US did not over react during the Cuban Crisis and that the Soviets misread the willingness of the Americans to go to war. It basically scared Kruschev witless.

It was actually Oleg Penkovskiy who provided the Kennedys with enough info to stop him being overwhelmed by the Hawks.

I'd suggest getting a few good books rather than taking history lessons from The History Channel[/FONT]

 

[t68]

Hi guys

I have been reading over the posts above and there are some good info their that idid not know about .

Can you suggest some books to read on the subject to gain a more broader knowledge of what actully happened .

I know the film was hollywood and would be a little one eyed ,but was GEN LEMAY that deranged like thay portrayed him to be?

Who is Oleg Penkovskiy is he the so called papa spy?

REGARDS
TOM

 

[gf0012-aust]

Hi guys

I have been reading over the posts above and there are some good info their that idid not know about .

Can you suggest some books to read on the subject to gain a more broader knowledge of what actully happened .

I know the film was hollywood and would be a little one eyed ,but was GEN LEMAY that deranged like thay portrayed him to be?

Who is Oleg Penkovskiy is he the so called papa spy?

REGARDS
TOM

If you want to look at a russian contribution, then there are a couple of niche publications.

Red Tide Rising by Weir and The End of the American Century by Robinson.

Both have one to one interviews with russians actually involved at the time. Everyone of those russians admitted that they were terrified, in fact the technician tasked with replacing the Mars probe module on the R7 with a nuclear warhead, deliberately stalled as long as he could from changing it to a nuke warhead.

An interesting aside is that when Kruschev wrote his memoirs, he admitted to lying about the capability of the Soviets to respond, he didin't know that the americans already knew that they had the tactical edge and thats why they were prepared to take his bluff. He also admits that putting missiles into Cuba was a breach of both he and Gromykos promise. In other words, they were willing to bluff and get the missiles in place as they underestimated US resolve as well as their overall Mil Intelligence

Strobe Talbot did a translation of Kruschevs memoirs, but they're not cheap. I'm still waiting to see them come out on special.

There's no shortage of info on the various Soviet spys who filtered info to the US about the Soviets intentions in cuba (both prior and post event). All in all, the general mistake still promoted through the internet is that it was the closest we came to nuclear war due to the meanderings of Kennedy and Kruschev, the truth however is always much more interesting. Kruschev was manipulated by the hawks at his end, and at Kenndys end the fact that Kruschev had broken the agreement (and also Gromyko) also gave the hawks in the Pentagon ammo.

The reality is that the US had over 5000 nuclear weapons - the russians had less than 300. The notion that it would have been mutual destruction has a degree of truth in it, but the USAF already had over 150 B-52's heading to failsafe, and they would have done far more damage early.

The USN already had the capability to launch nuke weapons at the Soviets, and they (the Soviets) would not get the same capability for another 2 years. So the US literally had the nuclear edge. The fact that Kruschev admits to being ill informed and ill advised adds some clarity to this.

As another aside, because the US had tapped the Soviet submarine cables they were reading all the military traffic from the soviet western ports, they also had SOSUS in place and were literally following the Soviet subs as soon as they hit the Atlantic. The USN Hunter Killer teams had orders to kill the Soviet subs as soon as they opened their torpedo does, and tracked them all from canada to cuba. they lost contact with number 5 as it neared the blockade, so one got through. As another twist, when the Soviet submarine commanders were interviewed for Weirs book, they inidcated that only one of their number would have released a nuke, none of the others wanted to be responsible for starting the a nuclear war, and they'd even worked out how to disarm and isolate the Politburo officers on board so that they could refuse the orders.

As for LeMay, he wanted to play for keeps, and wanted nothing more than to kill the enemy before they have the capacity to do it to them. You can bet that if LeMay and Rickover were around today, they would be chewing the ear of the President for letting the US military go softly softly ....

But, it was the LeMays and Rickovers who gave the USAF and USN the edge through their own bloody mindedness.

I've always wondered how the US would behave today if Reagan, LeMay and Rickover were in the executive....