Yes but wouldn't have any other possible soviet leader at the time done the same thing? Its the parts where he set up future failure that i'm concerned with.
I think if he was spineless (rather than merely soulless) he might have backed down sooner and thereby lost bargaining power. I don't know a lot about it, so perhaps you're right, but it feels like a "We don't feel our whole body functioning healthily, just the part of our foot where the shoe pinches" sort of thing (not to trivialize your criticism, it's more than a shoe pinching, just paraphrasing Schopenhauer).
Khrushchev sending the tanks into Hungary was the one objectively correct thing he did during his tenure
Smh, anti-tankies supporting anglo backed mass anti-semitic violence
Tankies are always right…
Objectively best decision he made
His handling of Cuba was more useful, though both were right
the post missile crisis stuff where he coerced cuba into not diversifying their economy was kinda cringe
Sure, but negotiations around the missile crisis were perhaps the biggest factor in Cuba not being invaded for some time.
Yes but wouldn't have any other possible soviet leader at the time done the same thing? Its the parts where he set up future failure that i'm concerned with.
I think if he was spineless (rather than merely soulless) he might have backed down sooner and thereby lost bargaining power. I don't know a lot about it, so perhaps you're right, but it feels like a "We don't feel our whole body functioning healthily, just the part of our foot where the shoe pinches" sort of thing (not to trivialize your criticism, it's more than a shoe pinching, just paraphrasing Schopenhauer).