Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
I was responding to your claim in #207 that the Soviet Union did not have a reliable arsenal of nuclear weapons to deliver against the U.S. until it got the intercontinental missiles it had in 1964. As I noted, President Kennedy and his advisers certainly did not agree with you. They were very sure, as was the rest of the world, that in 1962 the Soviets could have made a very large nuclear missile attack on the U.S.
I don't know why you repeat that the Soviets did not have a reliable ICBM until 1964, since I never disputed that. I was pointing out that their lack of one in 1962 did not prevent them from devising ways to attack the U.S. with nuclear missiles of shorter range--as they did by placing several dozen of these in Cuba.
If the Cuban Missile Crisis had "gone hot" the U.S. would've suffered "some" damage. A handful of cities destroyed at most (probably one or two is more realistic) but the U.S.S.R. would've been destroyed.
Such claims are;
- The claim that Western nations having nukes bothers you more than Iran having it.
- The claim that Iran isn't trying to gain nukes.
- The claim that Iran having nukes is as legitimate as any other nation having it.
- The comparison between Iran and the US.
Apparently you wanna be dishonest about it, sure go ahead, but don't accuse me of manipulating your words when I clearly haven't.
If anything that's quite hypocritical considering you've claimed more than once that I supported the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki when I've never stated so.
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump