Questions on the Cuban missile crisis

[perseus]

Regarding the Cuban missile crisis of 62

1. how well do you think the respective political administrations handled this?
2. how near were we to nuclear war at that stage?
3. and who came off best?

For the first part, remember that the US military were very hawkish pressing Kennedy to bomb the missile sites and invade Cuba, and the Russian’s shot down a U2 over Cuba contrary to Khrushchev’s wishes.

For the second, consider this extract from his new book, ‘One Minute to Midnight’, by Michael Dobb, which illustrates the stresses inflicted on a isolated Russian crew being simultaneously, depth charged, cooked to death, and suffocated in a submarine running out of air.

The Americans hit us with something stronger than a grenade, apparently some kind of practice depth charge, we thought, "that’s it that’s the end". After this attack a totally exhausted Savitsky [the commander of the submarine] became furious. In addition to everything else, he had been unable to establish communications with the General staff. He summoned the officer who was in charge of the nuclear torpedo, and ordered him to make it combat ready. "Maybe the war has already started up there while we are doing somersaults down here", shouted [the officer] Valentin Grigorievich emotionally, justifying his order. "Were going to blast them now. We will perish ourselves but we will sink the all we will not disgrace our navy"……. The commander of submarine B-59 had been tempted to use his nuclear torpedo to blast his tormentors out of the water, but his fellow officers had persuaded him to calm down

For the last part bear in mind Castro, the only hawk amongst the political chiefs, was humiliated by being circumvented in discussions by Khrushchev in his decision to withdraw the missiles. However, Castro was the only survivor of this crisis. Moreover, Castro obtained a guarantee of security for Cuba, and Khrushchev the withdrawal of NATO missiles from Turkey in return for withdrawing the missiles.

 

[Del Boy]

Well, it must have been handled fairly well, because we are still here, ain't we?

 

[Chukpike]

Regarding the Cuban missile crisis of 62

1. how well do you think the respective political administrations handled this?
2. how near were we to nuclear war at that stage?
3. and who came off best?

1. What Del Boy said
2. Probably as close as we ever came, with the possible exception of the Berlin crises in 1948.
3. Since the Cold War continued for another 30+ years, neither.

 

[rattler]

Regarding the Cuban missile crisis of 62

1. how well do you think the respective political administrations handled this?
2. how near were we to nuclear war at that stage?
3. and who came off best?

For the first part, remember that the US military were very hawkish pressing Kennedy to bomb the missile sites and invade Cuba, and the Russian’s shot down a U2 over Cuba contrary to Khrushchev’s wishes.

For the second, consider this extract from his new book, ‘One Minute to Midnight’, by Michael Dobb, which illustrates the stresses inflicted on a isolated Russian crew being simultaneously, depth charged, cooked to death, and suffocated in a submarine running out of air.



For the last part bear in mind Castro, the only hawk amongst the political chiefs, was humiliated by being circumvented in discussions by Khrushchev in his decision to withdraw the missiles. However, Castro was the only survivor of this crisis. Moreover, Castro obtained a guarantee of security for Cuba, and Khrushchev the withdrawal of NATO missiles from Turkey in return for withdrawing the missiles.

1. Del Boy said it, and it seems obvious, actually.

2. I was still a teen, but I recall our family separating (based on their WWII experince): My mother went with my sisters to Jugoslavia on her own, and my father took us boys to Switzerland (the idea was that both would be neutral in the upcoming war, and at least one half of the family would stand better chances).

These were times when ppl still thought a tin foil hat, a simple satchel held over you rhead, or even a towel would protect you from radiation if you survived the intitial blast:

Radioactive fall out had not made it to public knowledge yet (even in the German Army, a few years later, we still had the "ABC Schutzplane", a piece of reinforced textile fibre, that was supposed to protect you if you hid under it in case of "ABC Alarm"... :bang:. Supposedly you were (in maneuvers) dead when you did not manage to get under it in time, this was demonstrated hosing the platoon down with water: Who got wet was dead, the others survived... :bang::bang::bang:

So, my guess is, we were *very* close indeed, as everygody had already assumed nuclear war would break out.

3. Mankind (no Einsteinian Scenarios: ..."I have no clue with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with bows and arrows"...).

Rattler

 

[perseus]

Well everyone thinks they handled it well, but this is how events turned out, which is perhaps dictated more by chance than good management. As you can see from the quote in my post it could have led to a very different outcome.

Is there any way the RISK of nuclear war could have been avoided altogether? That this situation arose at all is unacceptable in my book.

1) Should the Russians have made sure they could camouflage the missiles more effectively before deciding to install them? (they could then have been announced at a time that suited the Russians, which is what they intended)

2) Should Khrushchev have been more aware how the US would react?

3) Should Kennedy have simply accepted the missiles in Cuba, since NATO had similar missiles actually on the Soviet Union's border in Turkey. In fact Kennedy was worried that the UN would think the US were hypocritical and playing bully boy.

4) Should Kennedy have taken Khrushchev aside and said here are the photo's, the Pentagon will force me to bomb them. Tell you what instead of this blowing up into something we can't handle, let's get both sets of missiles taken out before the public get to know.

Bear in mind that the US had a lead in ICBMs at that stage, perhaps that is why they thought it was unacceptable that missiles should be installed on Cuban soil within quick range of the US. This crisis led to Russia being determined to catch up, and they did to some extent.

 

[Chukpike]

Well everyone thinks they handled it well, but this is how events turned out, which is perhaps dictated more by chance than good management.

Since there was no nuclear war then it seems it was handled OK.

Is there any way the RISK of nuclear war could have been avoided altogether? That this situation arose at all is unacceptable in my book..

Yes, eliminate all nuclear weapons. Seems it was unacceptable to them also.

1) Should the Russians have made sure they could camouflage the missiles more effectively before deciding to install them? (they could then have been announced at a time that suited the Russians, which is what they intended).

Sure that would have worked.

2) Should Khrushchev have been more aware how the US would react?.

He was to busy at the UN pounding his shoe on a table and declaring "we will bury you".

3) Should Kennedy have simply accepted the missiles in Cuba, since NATO had similar missiles actually on the Soviet Union's border in Turkey. In fact Kennedy was worried that the UN would think the US were hypocritical and playing bully boy..

No. Does not seem like he was too worried.

4) Should Kennedy have taken Khrushchev aside and said here are the photo's, the Pentagon will force me to bomb them. Tell you what instead of this blowing up into something we can't handle, let's get both sets of missiles taken out before the public get to know. .

See answer to 2) above.

Bear in mind that the US had a lead in ICBMs at that stage, perhaps that is why they thought it was unacceptable that missiles should be installed on Cuban soil within quick range of the US. This crisis led to Russia being determined to catch up, and they did to some extent.

Actually the nuclear arms race was in full swing and Russia needed somewhere to put the extra weapons that were being built. The race started in 1949 when Russia exploded their first nuclear weapon.

 

[Del Boy]

I just can't see that US could possibly allow such threats based in Cuba - that was how we saw it onthe streets at the time. So the elimination of that threat without a major catastrophe must have been a job well done, whatever the negative side effects which we lived with thereafter. And please remember that long-term, in the event, Russia blinked first. We tend to forget America's long term credits, such as disappearance of Soviet Union and relative pacificarion of Indo-China at great cost. Now we have other threats to deal with, and still we have to rely on US for handling matters - there are no other candidates.

Rattler reminds me of the our outrageous attitude to the atom bomb radiation in those days. When I took my platoon to play war on Salisbury plain, after 2 days , following an attack and a nearby explosion, I was informed that we had been wiped out by an atomic bomb. We had been taught to kneel down on one knee and face the explosion when it occurred, covering our face in our hands ; thereupon we stood and advanced upon the explosion site. I guess that must have been closing in on our own atomic attacks. In the event, the enemy got me without warning.
Now that just ain't cricket.

 

[Mark Conley]

Strange...I was just thinking about what my family went through during the October crisis, and Kennedy assassination later on.

We were living in a city about 45 miles north of Dallas when the October crisis hit. First, they called in all the off base dependent family's, put them in the base theater, then told us we were all confined to the base for the duration. we were then shown films on fall out shelters, and then they played the "duck and cover" film, with the base commander telling us that a all out attack by the Russians was inevitable. we spent about 21 days confined to the base in a bunch of old WWII barracks they had. The weirdest thing was, we had no knowledge on what was going on outside the base. our fathers were involved in some kind of air craft arming and movement thing off the base, cause we could see the jets leaving, but none came back.

Thinking back over it, it was just a time of quiet hysteria. the moms weren't told a lot, just to watch the family's. it was like the base staff really expected the base to get blown off the face of the earth, but to be quiet about it, cause it would scare the kids. Most of what the guys here talking about, Kennedy and Khrushchev..we didn't know about. we didn't find out about the missiles until later, after we got off the base.

Then when Kennedy got assassinated..we wound up back in the base theater. same barracks. same films. only we only stayed a week that time.

It seems like the attitude was we were going to be bombed. but the ones left behind would be ok if we stayed on the base. kind of weird.

 

[perseus]

we were then shown films on fall out shelters, and then they played the "duck and cover" film, with the base commander telling us that a all out attack by the Russians was inevitable.

This must have been very frightening for the children, especially for those who could conceive what atomic weapons can do. Many politicians and generals sent their families away from the cities and military establishments during this period. A military base was about the last place you wanted to be. Perhaps the purpose was to isolate families so they wouldn't spread information to the civvies.

 

[gman992]

It wouldn't have happened if Kennedy didn't abandon all of those soldiers on the beach at the Bay of Pigs. And secondly, I don't think that I would've felt safer if there were missiles that could reach the US 90 miles off the shore or on some Russian boomer off of Long Island or for that matter Mother Russia herself.

 

[AVON]

consider this extract from his new book, ‘One Minute to Midnight’, by Michael Dobb, which illustrates the stresses inflicted on a isolated Russian crew being simultaneously, depth charged, cooked to death, and suffocated in a submarine running out of air.

This is a fictitious book correct? Submariners know the difference between sounding charges and depth charges. Yes, the USSR sent four (or five) submarines to Cuba. One new system that made its debut during this crisis for the USN was SOSUS! All but one submarine was detected and forced to the surface!

The Americans hit us with something stronger than a grenade, apparently some kind of practice depth charge, we thought, "that’s it that’s the end".

The threat level was far to high to tempt the situation by using sounding explosives. The USN anticipated that the Soviet subs had nuclear warheads on their torpedoes.

In addition to everything else, he had been unable to establish communications with the General staff.

Two of the captains of those subs have been interviewed. They stated, whether the Soviet subs started from bases in the Barents Sea or Black Sea the captains of the subs had been given authority to use nuclear torpedoes if attacked. With SOSUS support, the subs never got close to any aircraft carriers. The only ships the subs saw when they surfaced were the destroyers of the 'hunter-killer' groups.

It wouldn't have happened if Kennedy didn't abandon all of those soldiers on the beach at the Bay of Pigs.

Even if President Kennedy had allowed the air support, the CIA totally miscalculated the sentiments of the Cuban people. The Cuban people were firmly behind their government. Cuban intelligence also knew something was brewing. When the invasion first started, Cuban forces were placed between the beaches and the mountainous jungles many miles inland. The invasion force if things went wrong were supposed to escape into the mountains and start a gorilla war with Cuban military forces.

secondly, I don't think that I would've felt safer if there were missiles that could reach the US 90 miles off the shore or on some Russian boomer off of Long Island or for that matter Mother Russia herself.

The effort to place missiles in Cuba was to offset the IRBMs in Turkey and Italy. An IRBM in Cuba would have a flight time of five to ten minutes for all targets east of the Mississippi. A Bear bomber making an attack would have provided NORAD far more time to defend against the threat. The Bears also did not carry cruise missiles back then.
Remember back then the USN had the Polaris Missile and the USSR had no equivalent. So the possibility of a decapitation strike against "DC" and other leadership elements of the USA would have been far greater.
If the USA could not get the missiles out of Cuba, what would prevent Cuba years later from threatening one of their southern neighbors with these missiles?

 

[Zastava-Arms]

Is there any way the RISK of nuclear war could have been avoided altogether? That this situation arose at all is unacceptable in my book.

The missiles were deterants. What was to stop the USA from launching missiles onto Leningrad, Moscow, Vladivostok or Murmansk? ONLY the simple knowledge that missiles will drop on New York, Washington, Los Angeles and THEM DAYUM TEXAN'S!

1) Should the Russians have made sure they could camouflage the missiles more effectively before deciding to install them? (they could then have been announced at a time that suited the Russians, which is what they intended).

What's the point, if they are sitting in the middle of a missile silo the American spy planes wont notice them.

2) Should Khrushchev have been more aware how the US would react?

Everybody in the USA shat themselves, who wouldnt? If China was angry at Australia and they put some missiles in New Zealand id crap myself.

3) Should Kennedy have simply accepted the missiles in Cuba, since NATO had similar missiles actually on the Soviet Union's border in Turkey. In fact Kennedy was worried that the UN would think the US were hypocritical and playing bully boy.

Nope. Think of it this way:

Should Johnny accept the fact that Jacob is bashing Johny's little brother, even though he is bashing Jacob's little brother?

Answer to that is no. Why would America risk a few million people, when they could kill all the Russians without a single casualty [Tehnically]?

 

[Chukpike]

This must have been very frightening for the children, especially for those who could conceive what atomic weapons can do. Many politicians and generals sent their families away from the cities and military establishments during this period. A military base was about the last place you wanted to be. Perhaps the purpose was to isolate families so they wouldn't spread information to the civvies.[/QUOTE]

Wrong, every one and their brother new what was going on. The photos from the U2's were on the front page. The threat was real so they sent their families away. Common sense, although there may have been no where to go.

 

[perseus]

From a Soviet perspective wasn't the point to get the missiles operational BEFORE they were discovered? Supposedly they would then be relatively safe, since they were more protected and became themselves an effective deterrent. Non operational missiles don't provide a deterrent.

 

[perseus]

This is a fictitious book correct? Submariners know the difference between sounding charges and depth charges. Yes, the USSR sent four (or five) submarines to Cuba. One new system that made its debut during this crisis for the USN was SOSUS! All but one submarine was detected and forced to the surface!

The threat level was far to high to tempt the situation by using sounding explosives. The USN anticipated that the Soviet subs had nuclear warheads on their torpedoes.

It is supposed to be a factual account, based on new evidence

"One Minute to Midnight is nothing less than a tour de force, a dramatic, nail-biting page-turner that is also an important work of scholarship. Michael Dobbs combines the skills of an experienced investigative journalist, a talented writer and an intelligent historical analyst. His research is stunning. No other history of the Cuban missile crisis matches this achievement."
-Martin Sherwin, coauthor of "American Prometheus"

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0091796660/?tag=googhydr-21&hvadid=4704229539&ref=pd_sl_4f39cl8nyp_e

In the middle of this sequence of escalating tensions, according to new documents released today, the US Navy was dropping a series of "signaling depth charges" (equivalent to hand grenades) on a Soviet submarine at the quarantine line. Navy deck logs show the depth charges at 1659 and 1729 military time. At the conference table in Havana were the US Navy watch officer, Captain John Peterson, who ordered the depth charges as part of standard operating procedure for signaling submarines, and the Soviet signals intelligence officer, Vadim Orlov, on the receiving end inside submarine B-59, where the depth charges felt like "sledgehammers on a metal barrel." Unbeknownst to the Navy, the submarine carried a nuclear-tipped torpedo with orders that allowed its use if the submarine was "hulled" (hole in the hull from depth charges or surface fire).

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/press3.htm

 

[LeEnfield]

Well it was all a very close thing, and fortunately both parties bent a bit and common sense prevailed. I think that President Kennedy did not get the credit he should have done for the way he handled this crisis

 

[AVON]

Well it was all a very close thing, and fortunately both parties bent a bit and common sense prevailed.

It was one of those situations in which everyone was happy there was a "UN"! The open as well as closed agreements, it was nice to fall on being peaceful under the association of the UN.

I think that President Kennedy did not get the credit he should have done for the way he handled this crisis

That is an interesting perspective! In America, the whole thing was viewed as the gunfight at the O.K. Corral and, the other guy blinked first!
I do agree in that President Kennedy stood up to immense pressure from the US Military to invade Cuba. General LeMay viewed the perfect situation to attack the USSR and PRC first. The USA/USAF saw this as a way to eliminate the Communist threat. The USAF had evaluations from the Soviet of their military capabilities and knew that the Soviet AF and missile arm of the Soviet Army were not prepared at any instant to go war. The Soviet Union believed that if there was a nuclear war, the policy by President Eisenhower that America would 'never' strike first would be followed. The USA feeling the USSR would strike was prepared to fight with the forces that escaped the Soviet first strike.
When the Cuban Missile Crisis started the USAF had 2,000 B-47s, 600 B-52s, and around 100 B-58s that were ready for combat. Plus the Navy assets of the Polaris Missile subs of which the Soviet Navy had no counter-part.
It came out after the crisis that while most people figured the USAF would use their forces to approach the USSR from over the north pole, in reality they were going to make the PRC one massive freeway into the southern and central parts of the USSR!
Since Nikita Khrushchev's son wrote a book on how his father saw what was going on and in a interview made the first mention that two missile brigades were operational with battlefield ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads before the crisis started. If America had invaded Cuba, these generals already had permission to fire their missiles at the amphibious forces! Two of the submarine captains who were forced to the surface during the crisis have also been interview by the western media. They already had permission to fire their nuclear armed torpedoes at US ships, if they were fired upon.

It was a very scary time to live through.