The Critics of Arctic War Perception
The arctic war is a war of no battlefields. The heads of the states never pursue the policy of war. An arctic war is not a physical war rather it is a challenge to find out the possible solutions in consultation with other leaders within the country or outside the country before war. In other words, an arctic war is nothing but a cold war where ‘Cold War’ means such type of silent war where a subjective fact influences one country towards war by way of long-drawn-out discussion against possible evil forces. In retreating war, the heads of the states become apprehensive to make our mind up the crisis in order to portray competence and strength among other nations of the state. In ruling over a country, one becomes sufferer in respect of economic crisis, administrative blockades and lack of financial problems, the head of the states absorb in deep thought to bring out a solution to determine the problem. In that hypercritical state of affairs of a nation, a cold war predominates in course of time.
In referring to missile crisis, John F Kennedy has faced a stern problem and not being contentious, he was being able to succeed to retaliate such crisis and he saved his countrymen from the serious casualties of war with modern weapons and missiles. In this context, he made an amazing speech which has been replicated as hopes and aspirations of the people of America in their real life situation. He said that, for many years both the Soviet Union and the United States, distinguishing so called reality, have well thought-out strategic nuclear weapons with great care, never perplexing the unsteady statuesque which insured that these weapons would not be worn in the deficiency of some imperative confront. Their own strategic missiles have never been moved to the territory of any other nation under a cover of concealment and trickery; and in American history-unlike that of the Soviets since the concluding stages of World War II-demonstrates that the people of America have no keenness to administer or accomplishment over any other nation or force their system upon its people. Nevertheless, American citizens have become accustomed to living daily on the Bull’s-eye of Soviet missiles positioned inside the U.S.S.R. or in submarines.
In view of the above, it is evident that missiles in Cuba add to a previously clear and present hazard-although it should be noted the nations of Latin America have never previously been subjected to a possible nuclear threat. But this sneaky, quick, and remarkable buildup of Communist missiles-in an area well known to have a unusual and historical relationship to the United States and the nations of the Western Hemisphere, in infringement of Soviet assurances, and in defiance of American and hemispheric policy-this sudden, stealthy decision to station premeditated weapons for the first time outside of Soviet soil-is a deliberately stimulating and awkward change in the statuesque which cannot be accepted by this country, if bravery and commitment of American people are ever to be trusted again by either friend or foe.
