Talk:Cuban Missile Crisis

Lt. Leonard LeMaster

My great-uncle was one of the guys who flew under the radar and snapped pictures here, if someone wants to look into it and maybe add his name somewhere. Here's an article.

http://www.hendersonvillelightning.com/news/986-local-retiree-played-key-role-in-missile-crisis.html

Soviet motives for missile deployment

It should be clarified which of the motives are just hypothesised based on circumstantial evidence and which ones are actually backed by witness reports, subsequent actions or, at least, official statements. The suggestion that Khrushchev intended to blackmail the US into ceding West Berlin seems to be just a guess based on 'things Khrushchev talked a lot about at the time', but I see no direct witness confirmation of the claims that he was trying to right the nuclear imbalance either. The only official Soviet claim seems to have been that the missiles were intended to protect Cuba; of course, people reasonably assumed that the USSR also wanted to use them in its own interests, but the rest seems to be guesses. In effect, all we can see is the concessions that the USSR did, in fact, voice and obtain, which had nothing to do with West Berlin and were, instead, a promise by the US not to invade Cuba and to remove its own missiles from Turkey (thus more or less close to the 'defence of Cuba' and 'nuclear imbalance' interpretations). 87.126.21.225 (talk) 07:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

The Russians just declassified lots of documents, including the meeting minutes of a meeting on October 22, 1962 where he talked about his reasons. Maybe worth to add to this article. See also [1] for some background information.

Radchenko, Sergey; Zubok, Vladislav (April 3, 2023). "Blundering on the Brink: The Secret History and Unlearned Lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis". Foreign Affairs.

The evidence shows that Khrushchev’s idea to send missiles to Cuba was a remarkably poorly thought-through gamble whose success depended on improbably good luck. Far from being a bold chess move motivated by cold-blooded realpolitik, the Soviet operation was a consequence of Khrushchev’s resentment of U.S. assertiveness in Europe and his fear that Kennedy would order an invasion of Cuba, overthrowing Castro and humiliating Moscow in the process.
[...]
“Our whole operation was to deter the USA so they don’t attack Cuba,” Khrushchev told his top political and military leaders on October 22, 1962, after learning from the Soviet embassy in Washington that Kennedy was about to address the American people. Khrushchev’s words are preserved in the detailed minutes of the meeting, recently declassified in the Soviet Communist Party archives. The United States had nuclear missiles in Turkey and Italy. Why couldn’t the Soviet Union have them in Cuba? He went on: “In their time, the USA did the same thing, having encircled our country with missile bases. This deterred us.” Khrushchev expected the United States to simply put up with Soviet deterrence, just as he had put up with U.S. deterrence.
[...]
An American takeover of Cuba, he recognized, would deal a serious blow to the Soviet leader’s credibility and expose him to charges of ineptitude in Moscow. But as the minutes of the October 22 meeting make clear, there was more to Khrushchev’s decision-making than concerns about Cuba. Khrushchev deeply resented what he perceived as unequal treatment by the United States. And contrary to the conventional story, he was equally worried about China, which he feared would exploit a defeat in Cuba to challenge his claim to leadership of the global communist movement.

--Jo1971 (talk) 20:18, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Claim about the 'practical effect of the Kennedy-Khrushchev pact'

The article claims that '(the practical effect of the Kennedy-Khrushchev pact' was that ... the Soviets had no intention of resorting to nuclear war if they were out-gunned by the US.'

How was this an effect of the pact? I see no such claim in either of the sources. The Soviets were already out-gunned to begin with, so it was not a matter of 'if'; there is no indication that they had ever had an intention of resorting to nuclear war first, even less so while out-gunned, which obviously would have been suicidal, or that they had ruled out resorting to nuclear war if attacked, or that their intention to do either of these things or lack thereof was due to Kennedy somehow dissuading them during the Cuban Missile Crisis. 87.126.21.225 (talk) 07:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Italy

The article is not consistent about Italy. The fifth paragraph from the top says there has been debate about Italy. The box on the right treats it as certain that Italy was involved. 2A00:23C7:99A5:9E01:B5EE:EEE7:8444:69BF (talk) 11:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

The missiles in Italy were dismantled afterwards, whether or not it was part of a direct agreement between Kennedy and Khrushchev. (Aardi18 (talk) 15:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC))

Assassination of John F. Kennedy

Under Aftermath –> U.S. leadership, I find it weird that it isn't mentioned that Kennedy was assassinated a year later while still in office. Especially when the text just suddenly refers to "president Lyndon B. Johnson" without giving context. I've for this reason tried to add the below sentence about Kennedy's assassination. A source is needed and it can be improved.

As Kennedy would be assassinated on 22 November 1963 during as visit to Texas, vice president Lyndon B. Johnson assumed the presidency on the same day to which he would remain until January 1969 when succeed by Richard Nixon.