Oliver Stone

It's a bigger story because now it's the world is at stake. It's not the life of one man. He had a vision, as Peter said, of humanizing Russia, bringing them into the world community. That was defeated when he was killed. That was very badly defeated. Khrushchev fell shortly thereafter, the premier of Russia. He fell too because he wasn't sufficiently strong with the United States. So

It's a bigger story because now it's the world is at stake. It's not the life of one man. He had a vision, as Peter said, of humanizing Russia, bringing them into the world community. That was defeated when he was killed. That was very badly defeated. Khrushchev fell shortly thereafter, the premier of Russia. He fell too because he wasn't sufficiently strong with the United States. So

It's a bigger story because now it's the world is at stake. It's not the life of one man. He had a vision, as Peter said, of humanizing Russia, bringing them into the world community. That was defeated when he was killed. That was very badly defeated. Khrushchev fell shortly thereafter, the premier of Russia. He fell too because he wasn't sufficiently strong with the United States. So

It wasn't as appreciated as it is now. It should be read. How was it received in Washington? Oh, I would think a lot of people didn't like it because they saw him as some kind of idealistic fruitcake. Yes. I really think so. Certainly he'd fired Dulles and he'd fired the top people at the CIA, but I think there's a deeper...

It wasn't as appreciated as it is now. It should be read. How was it received in Washington? Oh, I would think a lot of people didn't like it because they saw him as some kind of idealistic fruitcake. Yes. I really think so. Certainly he'd fired Dulles and he'd fired the top people at the CIA, but I think there's a deeper...

It wasn't as appreciated as it is now. It should be read. How was it received in Washington? Oh, I would think a lot of people didn't like it because they saw him as some kind of idealistic fruitcake. Yes. I really think so. Certainly he'd fired Dulles and he'd fired the top people at the CIA, but I think there's a deeper...

People in economic activity also were upset with him because there were changes in the economics of the play. The Democrats were gearing up for the future. They were going to win the next election. That second term was very important. And they had a third-term possibility with Robert Kennedy and a fourth-term possibility with Teddy Kennedy. There was a possibility of another Roosevelt.

People in economic activity also were upset with him because there were changes in the economics of the play. The Democrats were gearing up for the future. They were going to win the next election. That second term was very important. And they had a third-term possibility with Robert Kennedy and a fourth-term possibility with Teddy Kennedy. There was a possibility of another Roosevelt.

People in economic activity also were upset with him because there were changes in the economics of the play. The Democrats were gearing up for the future. They were going to win the next election. That second term was very important. And they had a third-term possibility with Robert Kennedy and a fourth-term possibility with Teddy Kennedy. There was a possibility of another Roosevelt.

That was what was terrifying to the Republicans, I think, certainly to my father. And I think that ties in, you asked earlier why, you know, why, and I'm racking my brain, but I go back to my father who was a stockbroker, a very good one, and he was intellectual, he wrote about it.

That was what was terrifying to the Republicans, I think, certainly to my father. And I think that ties in, you asked earlier why, you know, why, and I'm racking my brain, but I go back to my father who was a stockbroker, a very good one, and he was intellectual, he wrote about it.

That was what was terrifying to the Republicans, I think, certainly to my father. And I think that ties in, you asked earlier why, you know, why, and I'm racking my brain, but I go back to my father who was a stockbroker, a very good one, and he was intellectual, he wrote about it.

To him, it goes back to World War I again, to this concept of they changed their system, they broke the rule, the international, the rules-based order was changed because now Yes. Not only did they break the treaty, no secret treaties was one of the first things they did. And all these treaties from World War I came out. The secret treaties that France, England had signed before the war.

To him, it goes back to World War I again, to this concept of they changed their system, they broke the rule, the international, the rules-based order was changed because now Yes. Not only did they break the treaty, no secret treaties was one of the first things they did. And all these treaties from World War I came out. The secret treaties that France, England had signed before the war.

To him, it goes back to World War I again, to this concept of they changed their system, they broke the rule, the international, the rules-based order was changed because now Yes. Not only did they break the treaty, no secret treaties was one of the first things they did. And all these treaties from World War I came out. The secret treaties that France, England had signed before the war.

So you see, that came out and the German treaties came out. So... But it was economic in the sense that in the United States, we had a lot of strikes going on domestically. We'd had strikes going on since the 1870s. There was a worldwide sentiment for revolution in the workers' socialist movement. It infected France, it infected England. I mean, it's well known.

So you see, that came out and the German treaties came out. So... But it was economic in the sense that in the United States, we had a lot of strikes going on domestically. We'd had strikes going on since the 1870s. There was a worldwide sentiment for revolution in the workers' socialist movement. It infected France, it infected England. I mean, it's well known.

So you see, that came out and the German treaties came out. So... But it was economic in the sense that in the United States, we had a lot of strikes going on domestically. We'd had strikes going on since the 1870s. There was a worldwide sentiment for revolution in the workers' socialist movement. It infected France, it infected England. I mean, it's well known.

And Germany was very much moving towards a workers' revolution. So that was the most scary thing to Woodrow Wilson. It was the Russians are going to destabilize the whole world. And Churchill was right there and he wasn't a leader, but certainly the English felt the same way. They were the leaders of World War I. So they had a stake in getting rid of Russia.

And Germany was very much moving towards a workers' revolution. So that was the most scary thing to Woodrow Wilson. It was the Russians are going to destabilize the whole world. And Churchill was right there and he wasn't a leader, but certainly the English felt the same way. They were the leaders of World War I. So they had a stake in getting rid of Russia.