What was the cuban missile crisis about?
599209
Kennedy and McNamara got pissed because the USSR were installing nuclear weapons on Cuban soil. World held its breath for WW III and the Soviets removed the missiles and JFK got us involved in Vietnam.
416495
A government in Afghanistan friendly to the Soviet Union was threatened by a coup thought to be engineered by the USA so the Soviet high command sent in the 20th Army. The coup was an attempt to thwart the social modernizations the communist government had instituted such as allowing women into schools.\n\nIt is ironic, most of the time we go into a country to undo the problems caused by communism, this time we went in to try to bring Afghanistan back to the level of prosperity they had enjoyed under the communists.
601644
I'm no expert, but most of the Cuban people seem to like American culture enough to push consensus to accept Democracy. There may be figures in the military that want to take the reigns like Castro did, so that may be a potential source of conflict. But if the US really wants to impose it's will, they can really pressure a new guy in different, more direct ways. Especially since Russia doesn't have their back anymore.
1005166
Probably because the rest of the world saw the USSR as a major threat to their way of lives and the US as protectors.  It's ironic that we are now percieved as the major threat to their way of lives.
480145
The embargo could hardly be called a new event since it was put in place by John Kennedy. Why don't you do one based on the soon to take place change of power in Cuba. What will happen when Fidel dies? Or about how even with the increases in tourism to Cuba in recent years, the everyday person is still denied access to visiters and the illeagality of cuban ownership of any kind of foreign currency.
279279
Cold War is called the conflict that existed between the USA and the USSR after the end of WWII. The world was divided in two sectors: the west, occidental, "christian", democratic, etc, with USA and allies; and the East, communist, etc. with the USSR and its puppets, under the power of the USSR. It was a situation of contained confrontation, like to forces pushing in opposite directions without a clear winner. Sometimes the tension provoked some very risky situations, such as the Missiles Crisis in Cuba, or persecutions, such as the famous Mc Carthy, black lists in the USA. IN the USSR, everything coming from the west was a threat. In the west, anything coming from the East was communist. With the end of the USSR--in the beginning of the 90's--and its communist satellites, the Cold War reached an end, fortunately, without a nuclear war. I suggest you not only consult a good book of Political History, but to watch a great and famous black and white movie of Stanley Kubrick (I dont remember exactly the name) for a satiric view of the Cold War.
699440
we were trying to stop Communism.  there was a thing called the domino effect and it said if it starts to spread to another country then it will fall onto the next country and so on.
588471
Wow, both of these answerers got it pretty wrong (it wasn't a revolution that ended the USSR for starters).   This is still at tremendous subject however - I couldn't answer it without a few hours of writing I'm not willing to do to help you avoid your homework, so I suggest you start researching.  Even the wikipedia entries on the USSR, Afghanistan and Chernobyl would be good places to start.
671108
I never relized that before, I mean helping castro getting elected nearly caused WWIII in 1963 with soviet missile crisis, Giving Saddam bio weapons in the '80's causing the current war, oh and helping the Taliban fight the Soviets in the '80's as well, who knows maby the russians would have wiped them out if we didn't supply them guns and HEAT-SEEKING MISSILES i.e. the stinger rocket launcher. I think our next "friend" will be a middle eastern or latin american rebel group that comes back to bite us in the ass.
333717
Gosh, this is difficult... I promised myself I'd never get involved in giving homework help (because of the reported abuse of internet 'help' happening here in the UK).\n\nHowever, the Cold War is a part of my personal history and I feel duty bound to pass on my experience to a new generation, so here goes...\n\nThe predominant feeling in my family was of uncertainty and sometimes (mobilisation of Warsaw Pact troops on the German border, incursion of Soviet shipping into our territorial waters, the Cuba Crisis etc) downright fear.\n\nMy Dad joined the Territorial Army (TA)(a bit like the US National Guard I suspect), so he'd be trained to do his bit when the 'coldness' went and we were at war again. With the threat of atom bombs there was a sort of sense that any day could be our last, so there was no real feeling of a certain future to save or plan for. The idea of 'what matters is that we are alive today, so let's make the most of that' - was a pretty widespread feeling.\n\nAt the time of the Cuba Crisis I was still at school and in almost all classes there was a radio turned on. We were given instructions where to go, and what to do in case of nuclear missile attack and shown public information films on Nuclear, Biological and Chemical warfare. Perhaps they thought young lads would be excited by the adventure - I was scared out of my wits and couldn't sleep at night...\n\nI guess we also felt helpless here in England. We are closer to Russia (well within striking distance of even their home-based weaponry) and no longer a major player on the world stage. Our future depended on how the Americans responded and I think that bred a sort of resentment, as well as adding to the insecurity.\n\nHow did it affect us? For me personally it had a similar affect to that on my dad. When I was old enough I joined the TA so I'd be ready when the time came. And even when the Cold War was more 'frozen' and the threat seemed less imminent, I still joined the regular Army. As I have already said we didn't bother with savings, house purchase, even saving plans inthose days... we just lived for today and short term goals became more important than perhaps they should have been. I think we were also less inclined to forgive, and more suspicious of people, which may have contributed (along with the stress) to marriage and relationship breakdowns.\n\nSpending went up, not because wages were much higher, but because we wanted to enjoy life while we had the chance and most people were focussed on the 'here and now' in terms of what they ate, how they dressed and so on.\n\nThis is getting far too long, but I hope I've given you some idea of our feelings and what it was like for an ordinary English family to live through the Cold War...
453323
The Cuban Revolution was the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista’s regime by the 26th of July Movement and the establishment of a new Cuban government led by Fidel Castro in the 1950s. It began with the assault on the Moncada Barracks on July 26, 1953, and ended on January 1, 1959, when Batista was driven from the country and the cities Santa Clara and Santiago de Cuba were seized by rebels, led by Che Guevara and Fidel Castro's surrogates Raul Castro and Huber Matos, respectively. The term "Cuban Revolution" is also used to refer to the social revolution after the overthrow in 1959 to present and the adoption of Marxist principles by the new Cuban Government.
427332
The Cold War was an extended period of bipolar rivalry between the USSR and the USA. Most obviously, it represents a period of stability in International Relations where the world was often divided into two seperate spheres - the US and its satellites and the USSR and its satellites.\n\nIn many ways this was also a clash of values and of political systems, of a liberal democracy dedicated to free trade and market forces against a socialist authoritarian state operating on the basis of a command economy, though it is important not to overstress this. \n\nTo a large degree the Cold War was nothing more than a particular instance of bipolarity where the international order was balanced between two superpowers.
98670
Eisenhower spoke at the dedication of the Robert A. Taft Memorial Bell tower.  \n\nThe day before that, on April 13, a letter was delivered in Moscow from Eisenhower to Khrushchev about the discontinuation of nuclear weapons testing - could this be the issue you are looking for?  I have attached a copy of that letter.  I hope this helps.
151364
U2 flight was shot down over Russia. Russia demanded an apology and Eisenhower suspended flights. The talks over reunifying Germany broke down completely as a result.
100632
Hair breadth from utter destruction- too many close calls\n\nOn October 27, 1962, a Soviet submarine officer named Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov reportedly refused to comply with the launch of a nuclear warhead while apparently under attack by a U.S. warship near Cuba.\n\nSeptember 26th, 1983 - Colonel Stanislav Petrov disobeys protocols and fails to launch Soviet Missiles after his early warning system indicated 5 missiles launched by the US at the Soviet Union.\n\nJanuary 25, 1995 - A peaceful scientific rocket is launched off the coast of Norway. To the east, in Russia, radar operators mistake the launch for a nuclear attack by the West. A deadly process -- nearly on auto-pilot -- is triggered. Within minutes President Yeltsin has been alerted of the attack. For the first time in history, the Russian nuclear briefcase is activated.\n\nI believe they're a necessary evil, especially in this age of rogue states and leaders.  The nearness to calamities, however, from false alarms makes them scary, and these are only the enemies false alarms, i wonder how many US false positives there have been since 1950.
814795
click here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-2_Crisis_of_1960
1007997
first , for complaints.... go to...\n\nhttp://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/cuba9848.htm\n\nthen\nhttp://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y06/jun06/20e5.htm\n\nfor more info on this here .....\n\nEXCERPT FROM THE NET>>>SOURCE HAS BEEN GIVEN\n\n\nThe term "terrorism," in practice, means the terrorism that THEY carry out against US. And the U.S. is not alone in this practice - it is probably close to universal. Cuba is certainly not alone in being treated this way. There is very rich literature documenting the practice generally.... Even the orders of the World Court calling on the U.S. to terminate its "unlawful use of force" (i.e., international terrorism, or maybe even aggression) against Nicaragua, and the supporting Security Council resolution (vetoed by the US), are unknown [in the U.S.], and if brought up, dismissed as proof that the Court is "anti-American" and irrelevant. The Cuban case is unusual because it is so clear, certainly since JFK ordered his staff to launch "the terrors of the earth" against Cuba....\n--Noam Chomsky, September, 2002\n\nTo understand the politics of Cuba, it is necessary to understand the role of the US in Latin America and elsewhere. By examining the history of the US aggression and intervention, we can see clearly the motives that have driven its foreign policy and what it is capable of given the motive and opportunity. It will then be easy to see why the Cuban people must take what seem to us to be extraordinary measures to counter this threat. For them, it is truly a matter of life and death. Recent developments -- shifts in popular opinion in the US, etc. -- are the basis for some optimism that Cuba/US relations may soon improve. Cubans must, however, exercise extreme caution if they are not to meet a fate similar to that of the former USSR, Yugoslavia and others. As William Blum states in the introduction to his recent essay, US Aggression and Intervention, in The Guardian (CPA), \n\nThe engine of American foreign policy has been fueled not by a devotion to any kind of morality, but by the necessity to serve other imperatives: \n\nto make the world safe for American corporations; \nto enhance the financial statements of defence contractors at home who have contributed generously to members of Congress; \nto prevent the rise of any society that might serve as a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model; \nto extend political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as possible, as befits a 'great power'. \n\nit will come as no surprise to readers that some international organizations, do not see Cuba as democracy. Following is a rebuttal of a typical criticism of the Cuban electoral based on an excerpt (in italics) from a report on human rights in Cuba by a commission of the Organization of American States (OAS). The section entitled "Elections for the National Assembly of People's Power and the Provincial Assemblies" begins:\n\nThe American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man establishes the right to vote and to participate in government at Article XX, in the following terms. \nArticle XX. Every person having legal capacity is entitled to participate in the government of his country, directly or through his representatives, and to take part in popular elections, which shall be by secret ballot, and shall be honest, periodic and free.\n\n38. Political rights, as considered by the Declaration, have two clearly distinguishable aspects: the right to directly exercise power, i.e., to participate in government; and the right to elect those who are to exercise it, i.e., the right to vote. This presupposes a broad conception of representative democracy, based on popular sovereignty, in which the functions by which power is exercised are performed by persons chosen in free and fair elections.\n\nThis is the case in Cuba. In addition to having the right to vote, every Cuban of voting age has an equal opportu