What are the causes and effects of the Cuban Missile Crisis ?
Alright. The USSR and the USA were always trying to gain and edge on each other in the arms race. When Turkey joined NATO the Americans installed nuclear capable missile bases in Turkey. Now Turkey is extremely close to the USSR and the Soviets would have barely any time to respond and yet the Soviets still had to launch missiles miles over ether the Atlantic or Pacific oceans to hit the American mainland. So the Soviets were happy campers having American and NATO nukes that close to their motherland. That is the cause So the Soviets were pretty pissed. So they wanted to do the same thing. So they looked to Cuba, who was a fellow socialist ally, and attempted to install there own Soviet missile bases close to the American Mainland. The Cuban were very happy to get the nukes because they feared a American invasion. Of course the United States was outraged the military was readied, the whole Monroe Doctrine resurfaced, just a huge mess. So the United States set up a blockade of Cuba. So the Americans and Soviets talked it out. So the Soviet removed the missiles from Cuba and the Americans removed the missiles from Turkey. The Americans lifted the blockade of Cuba and agreed not to invade Cuba. Also both the USSR and USA got quite a scare from the crisis so the USSR and USA set up a 'crisis hotline' so the two leaders can talk directly in order to avoid conflict. Effect. The End.
Cuban Missile Crisis - Biased for Soviet Union?
Although I'm on the U.S. side of the isle, the Soviets thought they had the right to use Cuba as a satellite country to plant their missiles because the U.S. already had nuclear missiles in European countries close to the Iron Curtain. What was not commonly known at the time, however, is that the US had far better nuclear capability than the USSR at the time. The USSR backed down because it would have been obliterated in a nuclear war while the US would have only been damaged.
Do Russians consider Putin a dictator?
I'm not going to pelt you with definitions from Wikipedia. Let's talk about the main thing. Most of you, dear Western friends, has no idea what it's like to live under a real dictatorship. I have - I was born and lived 22 years in the USSR. The type of society that emerged in Russia under Putin's leadership, believe me, is not even close to the rigors and restrictions of the Soviet period.CensorshipUSSR: Strict, everywhereRussia: Mild, in federal mediaTravel abroadUSSR: noRussia: yesElectionsUSSR: communist party candidates only Russia: Many parties, you can vote or do not vote without any punishmentprivate propertyUSSR: noRussia: yesprivate businessUSSR: noRussia: yesFreedom of speechUSSR: noRussia: restrictedfreedom of gatheringUSSR: noRussia: restrictedfreedom of religionUSSR: noRussia: yesHead of state:USSR: Elected by Central Committee of the Communist Party of the USSR (handful of people - high rank apparatchiki)Russia: Nationwide direct vote (not totally honest, but still - much better)I could compare in detail, but the list would be endless. I define the style of Putin as a mild autocracy. It's definitely not a Western democracy, but not dictatorship.
Why is China not supporting Russia over the Russia-Ukraine Crimean conflict?
After reading all the answers, I want to offer a more comprehensive perspective, some of which have been missed by those answers.For historical reasons, China has been a victim of foreign invasion and lost vast area of territory, mostly to Russia. Emotionally, it is not easy to support a vice behavior someone has done to ourselves in a brutal way. This has been pointed out by other answers.For realistic reasons, China is now facing reunification issue in Taiwan, some problems in Hongkong, and some ethnic issues in Xinjiang and Tibet. Supporting a behavior like winning independence by referendum would mean supporting its domestic separatist forces, thus putting itself in dilemma when it comes to its own sovereignty.But why China did not oppose it? The annexation of Crimea is not only a sovereignty issue between Ukraine and Russia. In China’s perspective, it is more of a strategic competition for sphere of influence between Russia on one side and NATO and the U.S. on the other side. As in recent years, NATO has been pushing eastward hard, making Russia feel extreme insecure. China is also under heavy containment by the U.S. Rebalancing Strategy. Supporting Russia right now contributes to winning more strategic outweight in East Asia. So China has to support Russia for the sake of counter-rebalancing the U.S..Therefore, China chose the low-profile way by acquiescing to Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and possibly offered some hidden support. On the one hand, it counterweights the U.S., and one the other, it successfully avoided the sovereignty dilemma it may face in the future.