All about cold war

圖片參考：http://imgcld.yimg.com/8/n/HA00782940/o/701005070138613873397690.jpg
A Berlin crisis , not a Cuba crisis

American tanks on alert in the Berlin Grunewald, West Germany, as the crisis over the Cuban blockade looms during the Cuban missile crisis (25th October 1962) In the early phase of ExComm debate, Kennedy blamed himself for the crisis - 'Last month I should have said that we don't care' - implying that if he had not given such a strong public warning, he could possibly have let Khrushchev get away with placing missiles in Cuba; 'It doesn't make any difference if you get blown up by an ICBM flying from the Soviet Union, or one from 90 miles away. Geography doesn't mean that much', he said. But Kennedy explained over and over to members of the ExComm and others why, since he had issued the warning and Khrushchev had chosen to challenge him, the crisis involved much more than just a personal affront. The reason was that, for Kennedy, the crisis was not centrally about missiles in Cuba;it was about Berlin .
The Soviets had tried to take over West Berlin in 1948-9. Their blockade had been frustrated by an Anglo-American airlift and by the astonishing resolution of the West Berliners, but in 1958 Khrushchev had once more revived the threat, and he continued to do so. In 1961, he and the East Germans built a wall around West Berlin as a stopgap measure to halt the exodus of East Germans from Soviet-controlled areas. Earlier in 1962 he had told Kennedy that he intended to act on West Berlin as soon as the US congressional elections were over.
Kennedy interpreted the installation of missiles in Cuba as a move preparatory to a showdown on Berlin . If Kennedy demanded uncompromisingly that the Soviets remove their nuclear weapons from Cuba, Khrushchev would have to decide whether to comply or to take the risk of actual war, which might become a nuclear war. The onus would be on him. If Kennedy showed weakness in face of Khrushchev's challenge, the effect might be to embolden Khrushchev to ignore American warnings about Berlin.

圖片參考：http://imgcld.yimg.com/8/n/HA00782940/o/701005070138613873397691.jpg


2010-05-08 18:59:13 補充：
Dear Fanny,
Refer to your initial question, it means that two events which one was a more serious conflict between the two blocs in the Cold War, right?
During the Cuba crisis, which might become an actual nuclear war by the confliction of two blocs.

2010-05-08 19:00:02 補充：
Based on their military power, developed new weapon systems and stockpiled nuclear weapons, is generally regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to turning into a nuclear conflict. Perhaps the effect may be more serious to the whole world.

2010-05-08 19:01:14 補充：
However, I think you should already studies the process & content of two events therefore my answer just focus on the Belrin Blockade which is treated as the main or serious source of the two blocs's confliction.

2010-05-08 19:01:52 補充：
Please pay more attention on the attitude, reaction & military planning of Kennedy in the essay during the Cuba Crisis which just was the aftermath of the Belrin's event. Thank you!