If They Were There Then

If They Were There Then -- My thoughts about the Cuban Missile Crisis and the upcoming presidential election. I've heard too many people say that it really doesn't matter, that they're all just "politicians" and it got me thinking that in certain times in our history, having the right person at the right time, making the right decision, has changed the course of human history.

And sometimes the wrong person making the wrong decision has also changed history for the worse.

Regarding the details of the Cuban Missile Crisis described in the video there have been some simplifications for purposes of time.

I refer to three options having been offered. Early in the discussions there were additional options on the table -- including doing nothing at all, that were quickly dismissed. It soon came down to these three as the only viable options.

Regarding the function nuclear weapons in Cuba, it is true that, at a certain point in the crisis, the orders were changed so that the field commander no longer had the authority to authorize their use without direct orders from Moscow, but this was late in the day, and in any case the underlying issue was always true, because the presence of *any* functional nuclear weapons in Cuba would have precluded an invasion, irrespective of whether or not the commander on the ground had authority or whether it remained in Moscow.

As to what Senator McCain or Senator Clinton would have done in that time and place, of course, remains a matter of speculation.

I pose it as a question. I think, based upon their records, how I have answered that question for myself, is clear.

Neal Marshall Stevens

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Barack
• Obama
• Hillary
• Clinton
• McCain
• Cuban
• Missile
• Crisis
• Election
• Primaries
• commentary
• analysis
• grassroots
• outreach
• news
• political
• commercial

[CyberCrusoe]

Wait a minute: if Kennedy didn't know about the missiles at the ready, then how can you give him credit for making a level-headed decision? For all you know, maybe he just flipped a coin!

[prodprod]

Weighing uncertainty is what a Commander in Chief has to do. When JFK asked the Joint Chiefs how the Soviets would react to a Cuban invasion in which Soviet soldiers would certainly be killed -- what would they do, the JCs replied -- nothing. He thought that was ridiculous -- that WE'D do something and the Soviets certainly would -- retaliate in Berlin or somewhere. That, at best, the situation would escalate.

AND -- the JCs were sure that they could get all the missiles.

Kennedy wasn't.

[CindyPantz]

awesome video! To complement it, I highly recommend The Fog Of War, a documentary on McNamara on the topic of the cold war. Great Work!

[MysteriousMaskMan]

I will feature you video in my channel.

You should produce more videos. This video is short and brilliant !

5 STARS.

[4everfrankenstein]

I was thinking exactly the same thing during the election.As a cold war baby, I have read up extensively on the Cuban Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs as well. I shudder to think what would have happened if the Pentagon had their druthers. I'm subscribing to your channel.

[hckyplyr143]

very nice video.

[shaufnm1]

I will agree that experience informs judgement. In a world where wars are protracted guerilla wars of attrition are the norm- I place my trust in the presidential canidate who is less likely to pull the trigger too quickly and that canidate is Obama.

Secondly- when making decisions based on experience is ineffective- judgement takes over in finding a another solution. Read Kuhn's book Scientific Revolutions.

[prodprod]

Resorting to ad hominems don't advance your cause any more than distorting history.

And McCain's whole argument for being president seems to be the same as Bob Dole's -- I was a war hero and I've been around a long time so it's my turn to be President.

It didn't fly for Dole and it's not going to fly for McCain.

And when the race is run, we'll see who's going to be the sad one.

[BrightFireTiger]

You're a Hollywood screenwriter and your world is made of fluff. Your video represents that. Fluff. A "What if?" video that only a simpleton would find merit in. A video that says nothing for why we should vote for a candidate except that he's not the other two major candidates that had to make a hard decision in an imperfect world. But then that is your candidate. An unknown that his supporters cannot even point to anything significant that he has done except win a US Senate race. Sad.

[prodprod]

You claimed that Lincoln *founded* the Republican Party and led the anti-slavery Movement.

If you're as well-informed about Obama as you are about Lincoln, you're only making me more confident in my decision to vote for Obama.

Many thanks.

[BrightFireTiger]

You're clueless about Lincoln. Period.

As for Barack, you need to read up on him a bit more too. In 2004 before the DNC, he said he didn't blame Democrats for voting for the war, conceding he wasn't privy to the same intelligence information. In other words, he knew he was just an armchair quarterback whereas McCain and Hillary were actual players on the field.

He says otherwise now shows he's merely another politician.

Your "What if?" video doesn't prove anything. Can't. It's meaningless.

[prodprod]

The discussion was about future performance based on prior experience -- that that should be a key deciding factor.

On that basis, Seward or Douglas should have gotten the nomination over Lincoln. Period.

The key decision in the last six years that both Clinton and McCain faced -- was yea or nay on the war. That was their "hard choice."

They chose wrong. Obama opposed the war in the face of wide public support for it, a choice that could have hurt him politically.

He chose right.