How Would You Have Handled the Cuban Missile Crisis?

  • Reject military action, negotiate a quid pro quo to end the crisis.

    Votes: 20 24.4%
  • Invade Cuba and bomb the missile sites.

    Votes: 23 28.0%
  • Blockade Cuba and use diplomacy to convince Russia to dismantle the missiles.

    Votes: 39 47.6%

  • Total voters
    82
  • Poll closed .
the problem is that even if you wipe out the ussr 95% they still have 50 or so icbms and the missles on cuba, plus bombers, so you'll prob lose like 50 US largest cities + london/paris etc, probably not worth it

They only had a few ICBM's in 1962, something like 10.
 
And how many of those were they actually lunch by that I mean problems with the missile the Warhead guidance not take it out on the first strike

Yeah, those R-7 and R-16 missiles were not great on guidance, but holy cow, those were large bombs on top of them. 3-6 MTs. You don't need to get super close to your target. If any of them do get launched, given how dense the east coast is, they're going to kill a ton of Americans.

Even if "only" 5-6 get through you're playing roulette with Soviet targeting and the civilian populations next to them. You take 10 hits in the wrong places and the US is knocked back pretty bad on the development side.
Capture.JPG

Also, it's easy for us to say, "yeah, we'd win the conflict and end the nuclear threat," but we're also not the ones getting reading to sneak attack SIOP-62 on someone and know we've committed something close to genocide.
 
Yeah, those R-7 and R-16 missiles were not great on guidance, but holy cow, those were large bombs on top of them. 3-6 MTs. You don't need to get super close to your target. If any of them do get launched, given how dense the east coast is, they're going to kill a ton of Americans.

Even if "only" 5-6 get through you're playing roulette with Soviet targeting and the civilian populations next to them. You take 10 hits in the wrong places and the US is knocked back pretty bad on the development side.

I think in the worst case scenario of a full scale nuclear war in 1962 the US loses about as many people as the Soviet Union did in the entire Great Patriotic War, so about 27 million. But like you said there's a bit of a roulette aspect to it since we might destroy the missiles meant for DC and New York but lose Tucson and Omaha to the few that get through, drastically lowering the civilian casualties. In either case the US is damaged but can recover within a decade or so.

Also, it's easy for us to say, "yeah, we'd win the conflict and end the nuclear threat," but we're also not the ones getting reading to sneak attack SIOP-62 on someone and know we've committed something close to genocide.

If Vasili Arkhipov launces a nuclear torpedo at the US Navy without authorization from Moscow the US probably initiates a full scale nuclear retaliation and catches the Soviets completely wrong-footed. Given that the Soviet Union will be a charred wasteland after SAC gets though with it the tragedy will be in never knowing that it was all a misunderstanding of orders.
 
I probably shit my pants right away, and after that’s over with, I feel like I have two options: negotiate or bet the farm.

Negotiate - gain the upper hand as much as possible, look for maybe an alternative site for the missiles in exchange for the Soviets getting the fuck out of Cuba.

Bet the farm - learn from Bay of Pigs and try to overthrow Castro again
 
Probably gone with the invade option personally. I don't know about the nukes in Cuba, do know about the massive edge in nuclear weaponry and lack JFKs war hero credentials so I would be much more afraid of looking weak. Therefore I would be more inclined to listen to my military advisers, who were saying invade/bomb
 
Top