Iran refuses to meet nuclear deadline

[marcinmoka]

Why not. If the U.S. can use them, what the hell.

62 years ago. While it was horrific, you must realize THAT IS THE ONLY REASON YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING RUSSIAN TODAY!!!!!!!!!

правда что Я говорю но было моим выбором!

[newbie]

Why not. If the U.S. can use them, what the hell.

62 years ago. While it was horrific, you must realize THAT IS THE ONLY REASON YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING RUSSIAN TODAY!!!!!!!!!

правда что Я говорю но было моим выбором!

Seems to me the bombs were dropped on Japan.

[marcinmoka]

62 years ago. While it was horrific, you must realize THAT IS THE ONLY REASON YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING RUSSIAN TODAY!!!!!!!!!

правда что Я говорю но было моим выбором!

Seems to me the bombs were dropped on Japan.

Good job. I'm glad you noticed that. A pat on the back.

And Vietnam/Afghanistan/Cuba/ Iran/Korea and Angola were just little wars, completely unconnected to the the Cold War.

If anyone with at least a TEEENY tiny sense of geopolitical strategy, please feel free to join in on the conversation. This is killing me.

[newbie]

Enjoy yourself with your little unfounded and bogus conspiracies. Not everyone who was against the U.S. in that time period was automatically linked to Russia.

[marcinmoka]

No problem, I will continue to enjoy my history books, my encyclopedias and the facts accepted by everyone in this world except for you.

I don't know how old you are, or maybe your high school history class has to yet to study that subject; but I'll give you a few links:

ENCARTA : http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761569374/Cold_War.html

Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/hist/coldwar2-en.asp

Sites such as the BBC and CBC also seem to support my "conspiracy theories".

Good riddance!

[newbie]

No problem, I will continue to enjoy my history books, my encyclopedias and the facts accepted by everyone in this world except for you.

I don't know how old you are, or maybe your high school history class has to yet to study that subject; but I'll give you a few links:

ENCARTA : http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761569374/Cold_War.html

Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/hist/coldwar2-en.asp

Sites such as the BBC and CBC also seem to support my "conspiracy theories".

Good riddance!

Sheer speculation. Nice try.

[Riverwind]

And Vietnam/Afghanistan/Cuba/ Iran/Korea and Angola were just little wars, completely unconnected to the the Cold War.

The cold war was mostly a bogus war. There was never any real threat to people in north america - just like there is no real threat from islam today.

When I say real threat I am talking about threats that can actually undermine our society and government - 9/11 was an insignificant mosquito bite from that perspective.

[newbie]

River, we finally agree on something.

[marcinmoka]

The cold war was mostly a bogus war. There was never any real threat to people in north america

Nice to say from the comfort of your Canadian home. But I was born "on the other side" of this conflict, in a nation subjugated to Soviet Rule.

Why do you think NATO was created? If America would of not flexed it's muscle, what do you think would've stopped Stalin from expanding into Canada? Maybe he would of had sympathy for us, because we're so nice and polite, gosh darnit! I mean, Stalin was the sympathetic type!

[Riverwind]

Nice to say from the comfort of your Canadian home. But I was born "on the other side" of this conflict, in a nation subjugated to Soviet Rule.

I never said that the USSR was not a threat to its immediate neighbors - I said that the fabled USSR was never in a position to threaten North America with anything other that a nuclear attack that would have resulted in its own destruction.

what do you think would've stopped Stalin from expanding into Canada?

Nukes and Economics - the soviet system was bankrupt from the beginning and the nuclear deterrent was more than enough to keep it on its side of the borders drawn after WW2. If the US was not willing to extend the nuclear umbrella to Canada then Canada would have built its own nukes.

[marcinmoka]

I never said that the USSR was not a threat to its immediate neighbors - I said that the fabled USSR was never in a position to threaten North America with anything other that a nuclear attack that would have resulted in its own destruction.

At least we're on the same page. I agree it would've been impossible because of MAD. But I was making a case with the other chap who thinks there were no reasons for the US detonating their weapons in Hiroshima and Nagaski.

Nukes and Economics - the soviet system was bankrupt from the beginning and the nuclear deterrent was more than enough to keep it on its side of the borders drawn after WW2. If the US was not willing to extend the nuclear umbrella to Canada then Canada would have built its own nukes.

And we had a very advanced program. This relates again to the other guys logic, not yours. It was testing a hypothesis of "if the US had no nukes" or "had the russian created them a few years prior to the Wests".

I think you understand.

[Riverwind]

At least we're on the same page. I agree it would've been impossible because of MAD. But I was making a case with the other chap who thinks there were no reasons for the US detonating their weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

That is BS. The US was perfectly justified in dropping the bomb on Hiroshima - Nagasaki is a little harder to justify but it was a war Japan started so the US can be forgiven if hindsight tells us the Japanese likely would have surrended after one bomb.

[Wilber]

The cold war was mostly a bogus war. There was never any real threat to people in north america - just like there is no real threat from islam today.

It's interesting that you should say that. Recent research into the Cuban crisis has revealed that unknown to the Americans there were already tactical nukes installed in Cuba. For some reason Kennedy resisted the advice of his military commanders who were calling for a strike against Cuba. He was an exception to the rule in that he was willing to admit what he didn't know and act accordingly. Turns out we were even closer to a nuclear exchange in 62 than we thought at the time.

[Riverwind]

Recent research into the Cuban crisis has revealed that unknown to the Americans there were already tactical nukes installed in Cuba.

How exactly would nukes in Cuba change anything? Does it really make a difference where the nuke was? A nuke on a ICBM from Russia is just as deadly as a nuke from Cuba or a nuke fired from a Sub. The cold war was over as soon as Russia and the US had enough nukes to annihilate each other.

[newbie]

"...The US was perfectly justified in dropping the bomb on Hiroshima..."

I don't think so. At least not where civilians would be killed. Even Truman didn't want that. They had tested the bomb in New Mexico so they knew of its potential. It was a terrible plight put on innocent women and children.

[Wilber]

Recent research into the Cuban crisis has revealed that unknown to the Americans there were already tactical nukes installed in Cuba.

How exactly would nukes in Cuba change anything? Does it really make a difference where the nuke was? A nuke on a ICBM from Russia is just as deadly as a nuke from Cuba or a nuke fired from a Sub. The cold war was over as soon as Russia and the US had enough nukes to annihilate each other.

In 1962 both ICBMs and submarine launched nuclear missiles were operational but still in their early days. MAD was not an established concept and there were still many who thought a nuclear war was winnable.

If the US had attacked Cuba there is no reason to think those weapons wouldn't have been used. You don't think that Cuba wouldn't resort to using nuclear weapons if it was attacked? Given the Bay of Pigs and the attempted assassination of Castro I think the odds were fairly good. Any use of nuclear weapons could easily have resulted in a major exchange. If Russian nuclear weapons were used against the continental US do you really think the Americans wouldn't have retaliated? It would have taken restraint on an unbelievable level not to.

MAD only works if neither side ever uses even one weapon. Once one does, all bets are off.

[Riverwind]

I don't think so. At least not where civilians would be killed. Even Truman didn't want that. They had tested the bomb in New Mexico so they knew of its potential. It was a terrible plight put on innocent women and children.

How many Japanese women and children would have died in the invasion of the mainland? How many would have died from disease and starvation as a result of a blockade lasting months if not years?

The Japanese were not ready to surrender - dropping the bomb on Hiroshima minimized casualties on both sides and led to a quick end of the war.

[Riverwind]

If the US had attacked Cuba there is no reason to think those weapons wouldn't have been used. You don't think that Cuba wouldn't resort to using nuclear weapons if it was attacked?

Why did Cuba need to be attacked? Do you think Cuba would have invaded the US?

[Wilber]

If the US had attacked Cuba there is no reason to think those weapons wouldn't have been used. You don't think that Cuba wouldn't resort to using nuclear weapons if it was attacked?

Why did Cuba need to be attacked? Do you think Cuba would have invaded the US?

Do you think North Korea would invade the US? I doubt it. Do you think that the US wouldn't retaliate if North Korea took out an American city with a nuke?

The Russians were installing missiles 90 miles from the continental US. All of Kennedy's advisers were telling him to take them out. That's the way it was. Asking questions like that 40 years after the fact is a mugs game. Whether it makes sense now or not doesn't matter. The fact is, we were very close. Kruschev acted like a cowboy and if he hadn't blinked in the end, we might not be here.

It's easy to say the Cold War wasn't a big deal now that it is over and nothing happened. It was deadly serious at the time.

[Riverwind]

Do you think North Korea would invade the US? I doubt it. Do you think that the US wouldn't retaliate if North Korea took out an American city with a nuke?

Why would Castro attack the US? Castro was not a stupid man nor a suicidal one.

[Figleaf]

Get over yourself! Iran has every right to go nuclear

Yes, despite the fact that they are vocal in initiating threats to destroy a nation which has never struck them.

That speaks to Iran's unfitness to have nuclear weapons, not to their 'right'.

Maybe Chavez should get a few as well. Heck, Nukes for all!

If I was Chavez, I'd certainly want them. It's a dangerous world. Canada should get a few too.

[Wilber]

Do you think North Korea would invade the US? I doubt it. Do you think that the US wouldn't retaliate if North Korea took out an American city with a nuke?

Why would Castro attack the US? Castro was not a stupid man nor a suicidal one.

You are confusing todays logic with the reality of the time. The US was not going to have Russian nukes installed 90 miles from their mainland especially in the hands of a mutual enemy. They would have gone to war to prevent it. That's all there was to it. They had their fleet positioned to intercept the Russian vessels carrying missiles. Where do you think it might have gone if the US navy had fired on or boarded Russian ships if they hadn't turned around? They were carrying out daily reconnaissance flights over Cuba. Their military was on a war footing. To say it was no big deal over 40 years later is well, I don't know quite how to put it.

[newbie]

I don't think so. At least not where civilians would be killed. Even Truman didn't want that. They had tested the bomb in New Mexico so they knew of its potential. It was a terrible plight put on innocent women and children.

How many Japanese women and children would have died in the invasion of the mainland? How many would have died from disease and starvation as a result of a blockade lasting months if not years?

The Japanese were not ready to surrender - dropping the bomb on Hiroshima minimized casualties on both sides and led to a quick end of the war.

I still maintain they should have targeted only military installations. There was no need to kill tens of thousands of innocents, regardless of later speculation.

[Wilber]

I still maintain they should have targeted only military installations. There was no need to kill tens of thousands of innocents, regardless of later speculation.

You can maintain all you want but we haven't been through years of what had already been the most destructive war in history. I have a hard time with second guessing those who were there at the time. After all, at the time it was just another couple of hundred thousand added to the tens of millions who had already died, in the hope of avoiding even more deaths.

Was it really necessary? We will never know for sure because the alternative never happened.

[Riverwind]

They had their fleet positioned to intercept the Russian vessels carrying missiles. Where do you think it might have gone if the US navy had fired on or boarded Russian ships if they hadn't turned around?

The Russian vessels turned around - that is pretty good evidence that the Russians already understood the brutal realities of MAD even at that time.

However, I will concede that Americans had to make it clear that they were prepared to go 'all the way' if the Russians did not back off. So in that sense I am willing to agree that the Cuban missle crisis was a key element that established the MAD doctrine which effectively eliminated the Russian threat to North America. That said, I am still not convinced that missles in Cuba represented a real threat to the Americans.