> Trivia time, boys and girls: anybody know what the original US
>                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> action was that prompted the emplacement of missiles in Cuba?
> ^^^^^^
> [...] NATO had put into place batteries of missiles in NE Turkey,
> aimed at the USSR, and it was in retaliation for this that
> Khrushchev put missiles in Cuba. [...] The problem is that today
> we tend to remember Cuba, but forget that we wronged them first.  

> Wow. NATO, led by the US, no doubt, decided out of a clear blue sky

> Why do you say they did it out of the clear blue sky?

It was sarcasm. You spoke of "the original US action" as the trigger for 
the incident, without acknowledging that perhaps the so-called "original 
US action" was in fact done in response to other Soviet actions -- in 
which case (by your logic) the blame would rest on the USSR, not on the 

In other words, you're claiming that "the US started it". But you're not 
backing that claim up with anything at all except your own word. I 
respect your knowledge of history and world events, but somehow I just 
don't think I'll accept your word for it that the US action that 
supposedly precipitated the Cuban missile crisis was the "original 
action". I bet it was precipitated by a number of Soviet events; in 
fact, with a little prodding, I bet you could even name many of those 
actions (hint: eastern Europe, southeast Asia, other Soviet expansionist 

> I'd be surprised if it hadn't been part of a strategy. Of course
> there was a reason. But that wasn't my question.

What question? You mean the one you already answered, that the Cuban 
missile crisis was caused by an "original US action" of stationing 
missiles in Turkey? I wasn't addressing that question; I was addressing 
your answer to it.

> Less ignorant than before,

> But more and more telepathic all the time.

Practice makes perfect.

> The problem is, to be sarcastic, you have to be sarcastic of
> *something.* Nowhere in my post did I ever said that NATO put
> missiles in Turkey for no reason

You clearly implied it in saying that "the original US action" 
precipitated the Cuban missile crisis, all the while ignoring that that 
supposedly "original" action also had a history behind it.

> -- I was clarifiying the idea that the Russians put missiles
> in Cuba for no reason.

Reread your self-answer, Marc: "The problem is that today we tend to 
remember Cuba, but forget that we wronged them first." Huh? We wronged 
them *first*? If you did not intend to say that there was no reason for 
our stationing of missiles in Turkey, then what exactly did you mean by 
saying that "we wronged them first"?


///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///

This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to