Cuban Missile Crisis and Film: Thirteen Days
For the last few years I've heard the Cuban Missile Crisis popping up when I read around other topics. I never thought it was a big deal, but sometimes I hear a snippet of something that would indicate that the Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the two sides of the Cold War came to open nuclear conflict. So when the film Thirteen Days aired on the television (a docudrama charting the Crisis from the view of President John F Kennedy's political advisor, O'Donnell) I recorded it and watched it. Then, of course, I went on Wikipedia to read about the Crisis and find out how accurate the film was :)
It turns out the film isn't as historically accurate as it likes to think it is and Wikipedia notes that it makes the military out to be particularly bloodthirsty, trigger happy and ready to go to all out nuclear war at the drop of a hat. It didn't sit right with me, although it made it very dramatic. Also Wikipedia has issues with the leading role assigned to O'Donnell. However, for the main events, the film tends to be reliable and gets most of the events right in the right order.
The film made me more aware of how close the world came to nuclear annihilation that year, especially given that, in 2002, at a conference reuniting the people who were involved in this, it turned out the moment that involved the closest use of nuclear weapons was one the USA were not even aware of, namely that a sub they forced to surface using depth charges had a nuclear armed torpedo and orders to use it if forced to surface but the captain decided not to at the last minute.
It was strange watching the two nations face off against each other in some beautifully choreographed combat dance, as if they were two primitives involved in a ritualistic meeting to establish the pecking order. Each action is analysed for intent and motive, with neither side actually wanting to turn the dance into a fight, but some clear hierarchy needing to be established and both sides needing to be seen to have not backed down. The amazing thing, that I've seen in other historical encounters, is the fact that in a large country the size of the USSR and the USA, the leaders never really have absolute control over their own side, yet they think the enemy does. So little things done on the spur of the moment by local people, like shooting down an American U2 spy plane or launching an intimidating program of missile tests by the Americans, cloud the central message of the leaders. Going back to the combat dance, it's as if both are wondering whether it's to the death, and a punch is thrown a little close to somewhere vital, you don't know if the other person was trying to kill you or whether they didn't and their aim was off.
It turns out the film isn't as historically accurate as it likes to think it is and Wikipedia notes that it makes the military out to be particularly bloodthirsty, trigger happy and ready to go to all out nuclear war at the drop of a hat. It didn't sit right with me, although it made it very dramatic. Also Wikipedia has issues with the leading role assigned to O'Donnell. However, for the main events, the film tends to be reliable and gets most of the events right in the right order.
The film made me more aware of how close the world came to nuclear annihilation that year, especially given that, in 2002, at a conference reuniting the people who were involved in this, it turned out the moment that involved the closest use of nuclear weapons was one the USA were not even aware of, namely that a sub they forced to surface using depth charges had a nuclear armed torpedo and orders to use it if forced to surface but the captain decided not to at the last minute.
It was strange watching the two nations face off against each other in some beautifully choreographed combat dance, as if they were two primitives involved in a ritualistic meeting to establish the pecking order. Each action is analysed for intent and motive, with neither side actually wanting to turn the dance into a fight, but some clear hierarchy needing to be established and both sides needing to be seen to have not backed down. The amazing thing, that I've seen in other historical encounters, is the fact that in a large country the size of the USSR and the USA, the leaders never really have absolute control over their own side, yet they think the enemy does. So little things done on the spur of the moment by local people, like shooting down an American U2 spy plane or launching an intimidating program of missile tests by the Americans, cloud the central message of the leaders. Going back to the combat dance, it's as if both are wondering whether it's to the death, and a punch is thrown a little close to somewhere vital, you don't know if the other person was trying to kill you or whether they didn't and their aim was off.