Talk:Viktor Belenko

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Removing POV bits[edit]

"Fame" is too much for a traitor. 217.144.98.250 10:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get a grip. "Traitor" to the Communist dictators? Sure. He chose freedom over a life of slavery to the state. If you can't handle that, tough. A2Kafir 13:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Fame" isn't POV. Murderers can be famous. So can heroes. Calling him a hero is arguably POV but he was undeniably famous. Kaleja 22:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, he traited Comunist dictators for good of Capaitlist dictators. But stealing of MiG turns him into traitor of millions of simple Soviet peoples as it's put their lifes in danger during cold war... Oleg_Str — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.244.17 (talk) 20:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
How's that? The only way the Russian MiG-25s would have been used was to destroy inbound American bombers. That would only have happened if America was under nuclear attack from the USSR (Khrushchev: "We will bury you!"). In short, you're complaining that Belenko gave the US a slight advantage, one that, combined with others, didn't allow the USSR to get away with the first strike they dearly wanted to launch. Well, gee, so sorry. A2Kafir 21:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Viktor Belenko got out because the Soviet system sucked...and he got out in style:) Wikiphyte 15:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If don`t know american plan "Dropshot" and dozens of another plans of preemtive strikes against USSR, you better not show your foolness. Belenko is bloody traitor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.82.170.157 (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Plans can be drawn up by anyone. But only the most extreme anti-American could think that such plans would ever even be considered, much less acted on, by the American political or defense leadership. The USSR was aggressively trying to spread totalitarian communism worldwide--and said so. Stalin would have attacked in a heartbeat if he ever thought the USSR could withstand the American retaliation; and all further Soviet leaders had pretty much the same attitude, if slightly less aggressiveness about it, until Gorbachev. And Putin seems intent on revinving that kind of aggression, which is truly sad. A2Kafir 01:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I could objectively agree that the chances of American nuclear attack were slight, but then so were the chances of Soviet nuclear attack. However, nuclear weapons are ghastly enough that even a change in percentages makes Belenko a great traitor indeed. --Kazuaki Shimazaki 14:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • For example, suppose that the aggregate chance of nuclear war during the Cold War was 1% (doesn't matter which side was going to start it because it was likely to be MAD in the 76-90 period). Suppose that the change to the Soviet-American balance is such that the Americans would be able to slip through enough extra bombers to kill 1 million extra Soviets thanks to Belenko. Then Belenko is responsible for 1 million*0.01=10,000 Soviet lives. Worse, he did not significantly alter the ability of Soviet weapons to reach American cities. So all he did was just increase the number of casualties to his own country, as well as the total number of casualties. --Kazuaki Shimazaki 14:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the other 99% that nuclear war does not occur, the Soviet people are still the guys that have to pay the price. The premature replacement of much equipment was mandated thanks to Belenko, costing the Soviets millions, perhaps billions of roubles. Guess where those sodding roubles ultimately came from. Of course, the Soviet people. That's a lot of schools and hospitals that might have been built if not for Belenko. Even if all they were going to build is an extra carrier, it was something for the Soviet people. Now all that's gone, thanks to selfish Belenko's desire to go to the States. Why doesn't he find himself a fishing boat and row his sorry butt across... --Kazuaki Shimazaki 14:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but he wasn't American, but Russian. If he decided to move after that episode with the aircraft, it doens't change nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.208.25.68 (talk) 13:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree with the OP's opinion. He had a pretty good life before he defected from what his wife says. I think there should be more about her. How does one not visit one's wife after so many years--especially after the dissolution of the USSR? 216.137.218.182 (talk) 05:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to you his wife tells one story. On the other hand, his defection tells quite another. How good could it have been if he thought the risk of capture and execution was worthwhile?
Wow, this argument is quite funny. This man was a military officer, he made a pledge. Than he broke it. Thus, he's a traitor. Communists or whatever have nothing to do with this. With respect, Ko Soi IX 01:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's a traitor by definition. The generals who conspired to kill Hitler were traitors. Were they in the wrong for it?
The OP used the word traitor in a pejorative sense. Really of course it's just like von Stauffenberg. He helped in his small way to defeat a great evil. Toby Douglass (talk) 20:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He is a hero of freedom and democracy as he contributed to the dissolution of the soviet evil empire(as Mr.Reagan said). He is a hero like Staoffenberg,Sschool
   Ahn Joong Geun,Yun Bong Gil(the person who achieved the first decapitation strike in history),Jeon Tae Il,Lee Han Yeol, Gang Gyeong Dae and Zoran Djindjic.

--Que interesante la historia de este personaje, escapó de la dictadura comunista de una forma bastante americana =D y con todos los hechos posteriores que implicó, fascinante. Debiera escribir un libro =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.126.126.145 (talk) 03:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe he should be described as an American of Russian origins. That description would be appropriate of someone whose parents were Russian, but who was himself born in USA. Belenko is a Russian living in America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.221.174 (talk) 00:51, April 24, 2010

Pursuant to an act of the United States Congress, Belenko is an American citizen with all the rights, privileges and obligations of any other citizen. At the same time or earlier, he rejected his Russian citizenship quite firmly. He is not a Russian living in America.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pfffttt. Of course he is! "Nationality"(ethnicity) and citizenship are two different things.50.111.22.49 (talk) 22:13, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removed unsourced material[edit]

The block of text below needs some references to be re-inserted. I didn't want to just delete it outright, but it'a a pretty sharp claim, so it needs to be backed up. A2Kafir (and...?) 03:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In 1994 Belenko agreed to collaborate on the writing of a book, A Full Accounting, with author John Joss, which revealed the fact-based activities by the Soviets in extracting American prisoners of war from Southeast Asia, for example from the "Hanoi Hilton" prison in (then) North Vietnam to the former Soviet Union to train their own personnel in U.S. avionics and air-combat-maneuvering (ACM) techniques. The effort was directed primarily at U.S. aircrew, for example the avionics specialists, often of senior rank, in the USAF F-105G "Wild Weasel" and U.S. Navy EA-6B "Prowler" aircraft used to suppress Soviet IADS (Integrated Air Defense Systems) and SAM (Surface to Air Missile) capabilities. The U.S. had, for its part, already tested Soviet fighter aircraft, such as the MiG-21, that it had acquired from Warsaw Pact nations and other sources.
One element of the story was the belief, based on convincing evidence, that approximately 600 U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps aircrew had been shot down over Laos and Cambodia and not "accounted for" at the end of Southeast Asian hostilities, despite the assertion by then U.S. president Richard Nixon that a "full accounting" had been made for all POW-MIAs. The record, according to the book, extended back to World War II and the Korean War during which the USSR had a policy of extracting useful Allied prisoners to aid the Soviet war effort.

US Citizenship grant[edit]

An IP editor added the following comment to the article:

It is absolutly untrue that President Jimmy Carger granted a citizenship to Belenco. Please check the US Immigration Law that a foreigner must become a permanent resident first and wait for five years and then apply for the citizenship. The US President cannot grant a US citizenship to anyone. Repeat, Please check the citizenship law with the Immigration Office. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.14.114 (talk) 01:44, February 21, 2010

The answer to this is that the immigration law the IP editor refers to is not material.

As discussed and cited in the article, Belenko's citizenship was granted by a private law, i.e. an act of Congress addressing a particular individual. Congress has the plenary authority to grant citizenship, and can enact a statute that grants citizenship to an individual, even if the other existing laws (which are, after all, just either also statutes passed by Congress, or regulations subordinate to a congressional statute) would have called for a different result had the private law not been enacted.

See Private Law no. 96-62, 96th Cong. S.2961, A bill for the relief of Viktor Ivanovich Belenko, October 14, 1980, for more information on the law granting Belenko citizenship. TJRC (talk) 03:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse the last post. President "Carger" did grant citizenship to "Belenco" pursuant to a special act of Congress. 74.243.14.114, please read the article before posting on it, and watch your spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.221.174 (talk) 00:54, April 24, 2010

US citizenship yet again[edit]

Since this is coming up yet again (an IP editor just incorrectly changed "authorizing citizenship" to "authorizing permanent residency"), let's make this clear.

See Private Law no. 96-62, 96th Cong. S.2961, A bill for the relief of Viktor Ivanovich Belenko, October 14, 1980, cited in the article. Clicking on "CRS Summary takes you to [1], which describes the bill: "Declares a named individual to have satisfied specified requirements under the Immigration and Nationality Act relating to required periods of residence and physical presence within the United States. Authorizes such individual to be naturalized." To be naturalized, i.e., to be granted citizenship. Not "permanent residency"; citizenship. TJRC (talk) 21:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viktor Belenko 2.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Viktor Belenko 2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Impact[edit]

This paragraph appeared and disappeared in the article few years ago:

The financial impact of Belenko's defection was enormous.[citation needed] The Soviet Ministry of Defence abandoned the construction of two aircraft carriers in favour of fully replacing the system of target-classification on all Soviet military aircrafts and spent over 2 billion roubles to that end. For comparison, a top-ranked Soviet military official was earning 400 roubles a month - a big sum of money at that time.[citation needed]

This kind of information, sourced, would be useful addition to the text. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 14:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did he defect?[edit]

I came here to find out why - there's no information in the article that suggests why he defected. This seems rather a glaring omission... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.222.23.139 (talk) 20:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a long time since I logged in, but I can answer this one. It was mentioned in the book, and in a couple of interviews I sadly don't have the links for, but basically it was a lot of things. Mostly having to do with how things where in the USSR at the time. Clarke Marek (talk) 05:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)Clarke Marek[reply]

Marriage[edit]

How could he have married (and later divorced) an American if he never divorced his Soviet wife? This is legally impossible.122.59.140.215 (talk) 08:30, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A number of men have multiple wives at once in the US. It is illegal, and the second marriage is voidable, or even technically void, but it happened.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The first marriage is null and void as he became a US hero. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noob2013 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Viktor Belenko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:34, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source for Moscow visit[edit]

The Russian article used as the source for the 1995 Moscow visit itself claims the source as an interview conducting in 1997 with the Hokkiado Shimbun newspaper, by journalist whose name is converted to Cyrillic as "Shinitiro Sakikava". Wikipedia should use the original interview as the source if anyone can find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.234.181 (talk) 12:40, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Death[edit]

According to [1] Belenko died 24 September 2023. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enzo32ferrari (talk • contribs) 06:22, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I helped added it. Not sure what is the proper procedure for turning a biographic Wikipedia entry into a deceased individual, but did the best I could. --Inceptor57 (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/washingtonpost/name/viktor-belenko-obituary?id=53291095
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Viktor_Belenko&oldid=1219890623"