CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS: DAYS SIX AND SEVEN
THE first that America and the wider world knew of the presence of Soviet missiles on Cuba came when President John F Kennedy made an 18-minute-long address on television.
Some 100 million startled viewers heard him say: “Within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. The purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the Western Hemisphere.”
The medium-range ballistic missiles were capable of carrying a nuclear warhead more than 1,000 nautical miles. “Each of these missiles, in short, is capable of striking Washington, D.C., the Panama Canal, Cape Canaveral, Mexico City, or any other city in the southeastern part of the United States, in Central America, or in the Caribbean area,” Kennedy said.
Sites that were still being worked on were designed for intermediate range ballistic missiles, which would be capable of striking most of the major cities in the Western Hemisphere.
The missiles added to the “already clear and present danger” that Soviet missiles posed to Americans. Kennedy added.
He announced seven urgent measures, including a strict quarantine of Cuba to halt the Soviets’ offensive build-up and continued surveillance of Cuba. The U.S. would regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any Western Hemisphere nation as a Soviet attack on the U.S., which would retaliate in full on the Soviets.
He called on Soviet premier Khrushchev to halt this “clandestine, reckless and provocative threat to world peace”.
“United States warships are standing off Cuba today to turn away ships carrying offensive weapons to the island,” began the Glasgow Herald’s front page report the following morning. The US was “prepared to sink”Soviet ships if necessary. And a showdown could occur within 24 hours, as some Soviet bloc ships were en route to Cuba.
TOMORROW: Robert Kennedy meets Ambassador Dobrynin at the Soviet Embassy
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel