wrote


They valued warfare higher.


As someone who has "been there, done that" I can assure you that nobody values
warfare except arms vendors.

Warfare is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a method to OBTAIN some thing or
some result of value.

JFK needed something that looked good to
counter his critics about the Bay of Pigs and
the Cuban missile crisis.

"Been there, done that, got the medals both times". The only critics of the
results of the "Cuban missile crisis" wore poorly fitting suits and drank lots
of vodka.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

They valued warfare higher.

As someone who has "been there, done that" I can assure you that nobody v=
alues
warfare except arms vendors.

Warfare is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a method to OBTAIN some thin=
g or
some result of value.

Well said!

JFK needed something that looked good to
counter his critics about the Bay of Pigs and
the Cuban missile crisis.

"Been there, done that, got the medals both times". The only critics of =
the
results of the "Cuban missile crisis" wore poorly fitting suits and drank=
lots
of vodka.

Not the results but that the whole thing happened in the first place.

IIRC, the Soviets were ticked off about the placement of Jupiter-C
IRBMs in Turkey. Of course Turkey was and is a NATO country. Moscow's
objection to the IRBMs was that they could hit targets inside the
Soviet Union in minutes, and were virtually impossible to stop,
compared to conventional bombers. They demanded that the IRBMs be
removed, and of course NATO refused - even though the Jupiters were
becoming outdated by ICBMs and submarine-launched missiles.

So the Soviets retaliated by trying to install similar IRBMs in Cuba.
Fortunately the preparations were discovered and their plans thwarted.

But what was kept rather quiet is that some months after the Soviets
backed down from installing their missiles in Cuba, the Jupiters were
quietly removed from Turkey.

And a "hot-line" was installed between Washington and Moscow so that
things could be discussed more directly by the leaders of the two
countries, and their representatives.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

They valued warfare higher.

As someone who has "been there, done that" I can assure you that nobody=
values
warfare except arms vendors.

Warfare is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a method to OBTAIN some th=
ing or
some result of value.

Well said!

JFK needed something that looked good to
counter his critics about the Bay of Pigs and
the Cuban missile crisis.

"Been there, done that, got the medals both times". The only critics o=
f the
results of the "Cuban missile crisis" wore poorly fitting suits and dra=
nk lots
of vodka.

Not the results but that the whole thing happened in the first place.

IIRC, the Soviets were ticked off about the placement of Jupiter-C
IRBMs in Turkey. Of course Turkey was and is a NATO country. Moscow's
objection to the IRBMs was that they could hit targets inside the
Soviet Union in minutes, and were virtually impossible to stop,
compared to conventional bombers. They demanded that the IRBMs be
removed, and of course NATO refused - even though the Jupiters were
becoming outdated by ICBMs and submarine-launched missiles.

So the Soviets retaliated by trying to install similar IRBMs in Cuba.
Fortunately the preparations were discovered and their plans thwarted.

But what was kept rather quiet is that some months after the Soviets
backed down from installing their missiles in Cuba, the Jupiters were
quietly removed from Turkey.

bull**** Jim

every movie or account of those days mentions it

and that the Jupiters were obsolete and scheduled for withdraw

and the Kendy had ordered their withdraw several time

And a "hot-line" was installed between Washington and Moscow so that
things could be discussed more directly by the leaders of the two
countries, and their representatives.
=20
73 de Jim, N2EY

"an old friend" wrote

bull**** Jim

every movie or account of those days ...........

I don't know what they taught you as a Colonel in the Chemical Corps, but I was
there on the blockade line (didn't watch some sensational movie version) and Jim
speaks truly.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

bull**** Jim

every movie or account of those days ...........

I don't know what they taught you as a Colonel in the Chemical Corps, but=
I was
there on the blockade line (didn't watch some sensational movie version) =
and Jim
speaks truly.

no he doesn't

all the accounts of the matter make clear that we traded without
appearing to trade the obselete jupiter bases

Try "Missles of Oct" or "13 days" but I have never seen any historical
or fictionalized account of those days that does not deal with that
trade

and assuming you were on the blockade line (I don't know but will give
you the benifit of the doubt) that would be the last place to learn of
such things

it was kept quiet for a time ( a few years) but I have known of the
Jupiters and their trade off since I was 4 or 5 years old or put
another way Under president Nixon in effect the next presidental term
to follow JFK, the event happened before I was born but I learn ed of
the crisis and the trade off at the same time in my youth

USA Chemical corps never mentions the misslis of OCT or the cuban
missle crisis at all in training
=20
Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

"an old friend" wrote

and assuming you were on the blockade line (I don't know
but will give you the benifit of the doubt) that would be the
last place to learn of such things

I don't need any "benifit" of your doubt, especially since you weren't even a
gleam in your daddy's eye yet. I was a Navy Radioman on the communications
staff of the admiral in command of the blockade. In direct communications with
Office of POTUS we knew, almost minute-by-minute, what was happening and the
rationale behind it. None of the movie-makers were there, though. Whatever you
learned at "4 or 5 years old" is a faint and distorted image of real life.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

and assuming you were on the blockade line (I don't know
but will give you the benifit of the doubt) that would be the
last place to learn of such things

I don't need any "benifit" of your doubt, especially since you weren't ev=
en a
gleam in your daddy's eye yet. I was a Navy Radioman on the communicatio=
ns
staff of the admiral in command of the blockade. In direct communication=
s with
Office of POTUS we knew, almost minute-by-minute, what was happening and =
the
rationale behind it. None of the movie-makers were there, though. Whate=
ver you
learned at "4 or 5 years old" is a faint and distorted image of real life.

not at all no one living in the times knows what was happening that is
simple fact indeed it is is only now that one would expect to know the
truth about those days, with the last of the security holds pretty much
expired. "History can never be truly known till at al least 50 years
after the fact" Dr Cutler professor of History as the preface to most
of his articles


Admiral Anderson had no real understanding of the presidents mind or
his intent, as he was out of the the real discison making loop as can
be clearly seen from the notes and of the various parties, POTUS did
not trust any of the chiefs esp Curtis Lemay, indeed I don't think he
was trusting the word judegement or descretion of anyone with a star in
his rank insignia

None of the chiefs were remotely in turn with the wishes of POTUS,
assuming you knew what the Admiral had in mind, you can't have known
what POTUS had in mind.

the movie makers had access to files and recolections of the people
calling the shots, and none of them but McNamarra spent any time in the
funny five sided building indeed you were just going on about how no
one knew at the time about the jupiter trade. I am quite certain Adm
Anderson knew nothing about it meaning that were not stating the turth
when you said "In direct communications with Office of POTUS we knew,
almost minute-by-minute, what was happening and the rationale" behind
it." a reasonable person can't expect to have both ways (but the word
reasonable let out most of the newsgroup of course) but we in the world
learned pretty quick perhaps 7 years later awfully fast for a "secert"
in those days
=20
Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

nobodys old friend wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

bull@@@@ Jim

every movie or account of those days ...........

I don't know what they taught you as a Colonel in the Chemical Corps, b=
ut I was
there on the blockade line (didn't watch some sensational movie version=
) and Jim
speaks truly.

no he doesn't

Yes, he does.

all the accounts of the matter make clear that we traded without
appearing to trade the obselete jupiter bases

It was HARDLY a "trade". We agreed to remove missles that were
already obsolete and unservicible in return for the Russians
dismantallying bases for "state-of-the-art" nuclear arms only 90 from
home.

Try "Missles of Oct" or "13 days" but I have never seen any historical
or fictionalized account of those days that does not deal with that
trade

and assuming you were on the blockade line (I don't know but will give
you the benifit of the doubt) that would be the last place to learn of
such things

"benefit"

The benefit is not yours to give.

it was kept quiet for a time ( a few years) but I have known of the
Jupiters and their trade off since I was 4 or 5 years old or put
another way Under president Nixon in effect the next presidental term
to follow JFK, the event happened before I was born but I learn ed of
the crisis and the trade off at the same time in my youth

Hey Mr Rocket Scientist... The Nixon Presidency was NOT the next
administration for follow JFK.

And nice try about the "...but I have known..." line. Cute...Not
true, but cute!

USA Chemical corps never mentions the misslis of OCT or the cuban
missle crisis at all in training

"missles" "Cuban"

Perhaps because you were never in the "USA Chemical corps", Mr
Pathological Liar. Or have they "reactivated" your "commission" so you
can justify lying in public again...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"an old friend" wrote

bull@@@@ Jim

every movie or account of those days ...........

I don't know what they taught you as a Colonel in the Chemical Corps,=
but I was
there on the blockade line (didn't watch some sensational movie versi=
on) and Jim
speaks truly.

no he doesn't

Yes, he does.

not realy

all the accounts of the matter make clear that we traded without
appearing to trade the obselete jupiter bases

It was HARDLY a "trade". We agreed to remove missles that were
already obsolete and unservicible in return for the Russians
dismantallying bases for "state-of-the-art" nuclear arms only 90 from
home.

it was not a fair trade but at the point it was made it served as a Fig
leaf for the Soveit leader (whose name I not going to try speling on my
own and I am not looking it up)

but made in the face of what could have easily blown apart everything
both sides though was valueble it likely looked pretty to K at the time

Try "Missles of Oct" or "13 days" but I have never seen any historical
or fictionalized account of those days that does not deal with that
trade

and assuming you were on the blockade line (I don't know but will give
you the benifit of the doubt) that would be the last place to learn of
such things

"benefit"

The benefit is not yours to give.

sure is

but then you don't respect any view but your own

it was kept quiet for a time ( a few years) but I have known of the
Jupiters and their trade off since I was 4 or 5 years old or put
another way Under president Nixon in effect the next presidental term
to follow JFK, the event happened before I was born but I learn ed of
the crisis and the trade off at the same time in my youth

Hey Mr Rocket Scientist... The Nixon Presidency was NOT the next
administration for follow JFK.

it was the next eletced one the next presidential TERM as I said


And nice try about the "...but I have known..." line. Cute...Not
true, but cute!

entirely true

USA Chemical corps never mentions the misslis of OCT or the cuban
missle crisis at all in training

"missles" "Cuban"

Perhaps because you were never in the "USA Chemical corps", Mr
Pathological Liar. Or have they "reactivated" your "commission" so you
can justify lying in public again...?!?!

neither stevie but such is not needed

=20
Steve, K4YZ

an old friend wrote:
wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

They valued warfare higher.

As someone who has "been there, done that" I can assure you that nobo=
dy values
warfare except arms vendors.

Warfare is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a method to OBTAIN some =
thing or
some result of value.

Well said!

JFK needed something that looked good to
counter his critics about the Bay of Pigs and
the Cuban missile crisis.

"Been there, done that, got the medals both times". The only critics=
of the
results of the "Cuban missile crisis" wore poorly fitting suits and d=
rank lots
of vodka.

Not the results but that the whole thing happened in the first place.

IIRC, the Soviets were ticked off about the placement of Jupiter-C
IRBMs in Turkey. Of course Turkey was and is a NATO country. Moscow's
objection to the IRBMs was that they could hit targets inside the
Soviet Union in minutes, and were virtually impossible to stop,
compared to conventional bombers. They demanded that the IRBMs be
removed, and of course NATO refused - even though the Jupiters were
becoming outdated by ICBMs and submarine-launched missiles.

So the Soviets retaliated by trying to install similar IRBMs in Cuba.
Fortunately the preparations were discovered and their plans thwarted.

But what was kept rather quiet is that some months after the Soviets
backed down from installing their missiles in Cuba, the Jupiters were
quietly removed from Turkey.

bull**** Jim

Which part of what I wrote is not true, Mark?

Perhaps you mean my reference to the Jupiter-Cs as "IRBMs"
(Intermediate-Range-Ballistic-Missiles) which are elsewhere called
"MRBMs" (Medium-Range-Ballistic-Missiles).

every movie or account of those days mentions it

Even if true, so what?

Those movies and accounts were done long after the crisis. What I wrote
is true: some months after the Soviets backed down from installing
their missiles in Cuba, the Jupiters were quietly removed from Turkey.

That they were scheduled to be removed, were obsolete, and were already
replaced by more-effective submarine-launched missiles and ICBMs is
inconsequential. The point is that the Soviets backed down publicly and
visibly, while *at the time*, the removal of the missiles in Turkey was
kept quiet until long after it was an accomplished fact.

and that the Jupiters were obsolete and scheduled for withdraw

and the Kendy had ordered their withdraw several time

Inconsequential - they were operational in October 1962 and were a big
reason for the Soviets' actions in Cuba. Moscow figured that if the USA
could have missiles so close to Soviet cities, then the USSR should
have similar missiles at similar distances from US cities. That the
Jupiters were actually meant to defend all of NATO, not just the USA,
was lost on the Soviets.

You also missed the point of the whole discussion: JFK pushed the
"space race" in general, and the
man-on-the-moon-before-this-decade-is-out, as a way to divert attention
from the Soviets' early space successes, and Kennedy administration
embarrassments like the Bay of Pigs. Space was a way to go mano-a-mano
with the Rooskies *without* fighting, and while they had a head start,
getting to the moon was far enough away that the USA had a good chance
of getting there first.

IOW, it *wasn't* about science, or exploration, or "the final
frontier", new technologies, etc. Those things were side benefits - the
main game was beating the Russians at something. But after July 1969,
there wasn't another clear goal nor obvious opponent. In July 1975 the
US and USSR did the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission, which would have been
all but unimaginable ten years earlier.

Just look at a partial list of early Soviet space "firsts":

1957 - Sputnik 1, first artificial earth satellite
1957 - Sputnik 2, first animal in space (Laika the dog)
1959 - Luna 2 impacts moon (intentionally!)
1961 - Vostok 1 - Yuri Gagarin is first human in space and first to
orbit the earth
1962 - Mars 1 - First flyby of Mars
1964 - Voskhod 1 - First multiperson mission (three cosmonauts)
1965 - Voskhod 2 - Alexei Leonov makes first space walk
1966 - Luna 9 soft lands on the Moon and returns TV pictures
1966 - Venera 3 is first spacecraft to enter atmosphere of another
planet (Venus)
1966 - Luna 10 orbits Moon (first spacecraft to orbit another world)

Also the first woman in space, first pictures of the far side of the
moon, and much more.

And a "hot-line" was installed between Washington and Moscow so that
things could be discussed more directly by the leaders of the two
countries, and their representatives.

73 de Jim, N2EY