Embargo on Cuba punishes Americans for the crimes of Fidel Castro, Libertarians say

The US restricts travel to several states. I don't know the whole list; North Korea is probably on there, possibly Syria and Libya as well. Other states, such as the UK, don't tell their citizens where not to travel. They might strongly advise people to avoid certain areas, but the choice is your own.

Its amazing this conflict has been going on so long. Even those involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion have forgiven Cuba and many of them reunited in Havana last year:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/index.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/press2.html

The weird part about US relations with Cuba is that there is now evidence that the US wanted Cuba to ask the USSR for arms as a pretext for an invasion.
(see point 4 on page 2 of http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/19591124.pdf )

But even after the US failed to take Cuba, Castro kept up his efforts to make peace with the US.Castro even told LBJ to attack him as much as he wanted if it would help Johnson win the election:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/19640212.pdf

Imperialism. The invisible hand of the market is always followed by the invisible boot. Libertarians don't understand this. Hence, they're the true idealists and wishful thinkers.

the U.S. embargo(rejected by over 100+ nations every year in the UN) punishes U.S. citizens & companies for the crimes of:

A) "Coups R Us" CIA plotters
B) U.S. Imperialist plundering of resources
C) Bush/Cheney oil conspiracy
D) American nuclear blackmail on non-nuclear states

Call me an S&M freak, but I don't mind the punishment one bit. Learn about the Cuban missile crisis and how Soviet long range nuclear missiles could have be poised 50 miles off the coast of Florida and pointing at you and you might not mind the punishment so much either.

Airborne travel time of a balistic missile from Cuba to practically anywhere in the US: ~ 5 to 20 minutes.

So, is Bush trying to help Castro, buy keeping the Imperialistic American Capitalists off the Communist Island Paradise?

The Cubans, and especially the Soviet forces that stayed in Cuba after the crisis, kept tactical nuclear missiles. The Soviet troops were actually on the brink of using them at one point if an invasion occured, not having to wait on Moscow's permission to use any and all force to defend themselves.

I read it in several places and saw it on a PBS special. There are tactical nukes supposedly still in Cuba, very likely pointed at Guantanamo and perhaps Miami.

As one Cuban official once put it, "if the US invades us, it will be the hardest bone they ever swallowed."

-Ché

The type of tactical nukes Cuba is assumed to have about 7 of in their arsenal are Surface-to-Surface Missiles (SSM), such as the SCUD, and with nuclear warheads. CBW could be implemented on them instead of a nuclear warhead, but I'm not so sure about how vicious the Cubans really are, and if they'd be willing to dump CBW into Guantanamo. The idea of the tactical nukes (SSM's) for the Cubans is that they could wipe out invading fleets (or a base) with a single blow.

Beyond weapons tactics, they do have their social circles that are ready to defend and organize the whole population quickly into a resistance force. Those were successful in the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Whatever the case is, certainly the base in Guantanamo will always be some sort of signal that the U.S. isn't about to attempt an invasion.

¡Venceremos!

By whom?

Source, please.

I went home with a waitress
The way I always do
How was I to know
She was with the Russians too?


I was gambling in Havannah
I took a little risk
Send lawyers, guns, and money
Dad, get me out of this


I'm the innocent bystander
And somehow I got stuck
Between a rock and a hard place
And I'm down on my luck


I'm hiding in Honduras
I'm a desperate man
Send lawyers, guns, and money
The shit has hit the fan

>It was the positioning of US missiles in Turkey that precipitated the crisis.

That is Communist bullcrap. When directly questioned by American officials and others about the existance of those missiles in Cuba, the Soviet Ambassador to the UN adamantly denied their existance. It wasn't until he was humiliated by American reconnaissance photos of them that he had to come clean.

Not to mention the fact that those missiles were in Turkey a long time before the crisis and they were old Jupiter missiles that were not even of equal magnitude as those in Cuba.

And the fact that Kennedy had decided those Jupiter missiles were to be removed months prior to the incident. The Russians just wanted to make a public display of there removal. Just like the Chinese did last year when their fighter plane crashed into our in international air space. Socialist nations are notorious for that sort of thing.

>The Russians were merely defending themselves.

Yeah, that's what we call it when we shoot down enemy reconnaissance planes. They shot one down over Russia and shot at them over Cuba. If it hadn't been for those planes and sattelite photos we wouldn't have known what those bastards were up too.

>American history teaches us that the Russians backed down, but in fact it was the Americans who backed down by promising to remove the missiles from Turkey and not to invade Cuba.

The missiles were already coming out, and when was the last time the US unprovokingly invaded any nation?

>Then, and only then, did the Russians withdraw their missiles from Cuba.

If they so elequantly won the battle as you'd like to believe, who won the war? What happened to the great communist nation of Russia? They bankrupted themselves trying to keep up. There's more than one way to skin the proverbial cat.

The world theatre mimics a chess game. You don't have to win by force. More times than not, you can sit back and let your opponent beat himself.

>They're holding off the Colossus of the North somehow. Somehow I doubt it’s just Cuban air defense.

Give me a break. They're holding us off by keeping their mouth's shut and out of the limelight. This recent trip by Carter was the first thing I've heard about Castro in over a decade. We've forgotten Cuba is even there.

Live and let live. Americans can give a crap what form of government you advocate as long as you don't threaten or attack our existance.

"when was the last time the US unprovokingly invaded any nation?"

Granada
Panama
South Vietnam

When Eric asked "when was the last time the US unprovokingly invaded any nation?", it should have been understood he meant "with the full intention of occupying that nation and having the rule over it."

Now answer.

Sometimes you just have to spell it out for some folks.

How about Chile in 1973? Nicaragua in the 80s? Colombia? The US has historically backed rightwing forces and regimes in these countries. Course, that's just power politics, is it not? You probably don't care too much about that.

Alright, what about the supposed "humanitarian" missions? Somalia, Haiti and Kosovo? US had imperialist aims and ambitions for those, too. Ended up helping right wing militia members in Somalia to power while massacring civilians. Has interfered with the democratic movement in Haiti recently. In Kosovo, didn't care about Serbian oppression until the conflict threatend to spread over to Turkey and Greece, not to help the Albanians. What more do you want? Get your head out of uncle sam's ass.

Go ahead and bring up communism. Most people here don't support stalinism, ya dumbass.

>It was the positioning of US missiles in Turkey that precipitated the crisis. The Russians were merely defending themselves. American history teaches us that the Russians backed down, but in fact it was the Americans who backed down by promising to remove the missiles from Turkey and not to invade Cuba. Then, and only then, did the Russians withdraw their missiles from Cuba.

Good God, DQ, can we just fucking re-write history now??

The US confirmed that Cuba had prepared sites for nuclear weapons and that Soviet SS-3's and SS-4's with a range of 1100 nm were in place, and that the Soviets were shipping in more. The Soviets claimed that Cuba, as a free state, desired the missles to defend itself from invaders.

Khrushchev, in letters to Kennedy, made reference to the missles in Turkey among other countries, and suggested that Cuba would dismantle if Turkey would, but the State Dept. quickly dismissed this as an unfair tradeoff; namely NATO dismantleing missles it needed to defend Europe in exchange for the USSR dismanteling missles that should never have been there in the first place. At the time, there were 15 Jupiter missles aimed at the USSR. They remained.

Quite frankly, the USSR got caught red-handed (pun intended) and jumped on the missles in Turkey as a way to save face. The US didn't buy it then, and I don't now.

Why the USSR armed Cuba is as obvious now as it was then, to get a foothold in the Western Hemisphere. Some have speculated that the USSR wished to provoke an attack by the US on Cuba so that the Soviets could justifiably roll tanks into West Berlin. Khrushchev also mistakenly believed that the US had missles in Japan.

The promise to Russia did not involve Turkey at all. It was 1) not to invade Cuba and 2) to work towards arms reduction.

The USSR also demanded we remove our base from Guantanamo. They didn't get that either.

Americans don't back down!! We make the rules!!

For those interested in knowing the truth, here's a good read:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/forrel/cuba/cubamenu.htm

If Americans were allowed to travel to Cuba, economic ties would crumble political relation problems. Cubans want American citizens to visit, Americans want to visit. Build a bridge.

At no point in the history of modern military might could Russia have defeated the U S A.

There is a strength of pride in American citizens for there country that cant be calculated. We ship millions of tons of food around the world at our cost to give to the hungry. We supply medical aid equipment medicene and doctors to all points on the globe. We build bridges roads schools ports air ports water treatment power systems communication education desalinization. Americans do this with no thanks nor any demand of thanks.

Some of us would like to go to Cuba. We could help them out. Build a bridge. No thanks needed.

I don’t give a rats ass what Thomas Blanton wrote or anyone else for that matter. It’s quantified with the line that “this could not be an explicit quid pro quo and that the deal would never be publicly acknowledged by the United States.” Ok, so listen up everyone. We’ve sent astronauts to Pluto and have a base set up on the planet, but this will “never be publicly acknowledged by the United States.”

I hate this is long, but it’s not by choice. I prefer DOCUMENTED evidence. Here’s what happened:


No. 91. Message From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy

You are disturbed over Cuba. You say that this disturbs you because it is 90 miles by sea from the coast of the United States of America. But Turkey adjoins us; our sentries patrol back and forth and see each other. Do you consider, then, that you have the right to demand security for your own country and the removal of the weapons you call offensive, but do not accord the same right to us? You have placed destructive missile weapons, which you call offensive, in Turkey, literally next to us. How then can recognition of our equal military capacities be reconciled with such unequal relations between our great states? This is irreconcilable.


No. 92. Record of the Fourth Meeting of the Berlin-NATO Subcommittee of the Executive Committee of the National Security Council

4. Base Trade-Off
The subject was discussed and while no firm and formal judgments were reached the sense of the group was that the door should be closed as quickly as possible on the idea of trading the U.S. position in Turkey for the Soviet position in Cuba. In connection with the nervousness of the Turks on this score, it was proposed that a special envoy, possibly Mr. Livingston Merchant, should be sent to Ankara to consult with the Turkish government and keep them informed of developments in this area.

5. Khrushchev Letter
(Mr. Nitze joined the meeting at this point.) Mr. Nitze summarized the contents of the letter sent by Khrushchev last night(2) to the President and also referred to a subsequent TASS release which linked the Cuban missiles with those in Turkey.(3) Mr. Nitze read a draft of a proposed reply(4) and there was a brief discussion with particular emphasis on its final paragraph which referred to the security of nations outside the Western Hemisphere. The sense of the group regarding the need to keep Turkish bases from being linked in any way with the Cuban situation was conveyed to Mr. Nitze.


No. 93. Telegram From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State

1. We showed SYG Khrushchev's message of last night to the President,(1) pointing out that it contained no reference to Turkey. We also pointed out it in effect conceded existence in Cuba of complete nuclear missile capability. SYG had just seen Reuter despatch regarding Khrushchev's public statement regarding Turkey.(2)

2. We pointed out that effect of Khrushchev's Turkey proposal was that, as the result of his own clandestine nuclear intrusion into the Western Hemisphere, he gets a guarantee of Cuban integrity and the removal of the Turkey base, whereas all we get is removal of intrusion which he should not have made anyway.

3. We also pointed out that the Turkey base is not for the defense of Turkey but for the defense of Europe and is part of the whole NATO defensive structure. The removal of that base would upset the European balance of power.

4. We pointed out that these were informal observations and that we had no positive instructions from Washington.

5. We said the Turkish base might be a proper subject for discussion covering various aspects of the overall disarmament and European situations after the status quo had been restored, and that such restoration requires removal of weapons from Cuba.

6. Since all NATO partners involved in Turkey base any negotiations as to its removal would require a great deal of time whereas removal of nuclear weapons from Cuba was an immediate essential.

7. We said it seemed highly probable that the Cuban issue could be very promptly settled on the basis of Khrushchev's first letter, namely, on basis of immediate withdrawal of nuclear weapons as against US guarantee as to territorial integrity and political independence of Cuba, and we urged SYG to press for such immediate solution and for confining all discussions to Cuba and the exclusion of the Turkish base problem.


No. 95. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union

I have read your letter of October 26(1) with great care and welcomed the statement of your desire to seek a prompt solution to the problem. The first thing that needs to be done, however, is for work to cease on offensive missile bases in Cuba and for all weapons systems in Cuba capable of offensive use to be rendered inoperable, under effective United Nations arrangements.
Assuming this is done promptly, I have given my representatives in New York instructions that will permit them to work out this week and--in cooperation with the Acting Secretary General and your representative--an arrangement for a permanent solution to the Cuban problem along the lines suggested in your letter of October 26. As I read your letter, the key elements of your proposals--which seem generally acceptable as I understand them--are as follows:

1. You would agree to remove these weapons systems from Cuba under appropriate United Nations observation and supervision; and undertake, with suitable safeguards, to halt the further introduction of such weapons systems into Cuba.

2. We, on our part, would agree--upon the establishment of adequate arrangements through the United Nations to ensure the carrying out and continuation of these commitments--(a) to remove promptly the quarantine measures now in effect and (b) to give assurances against an invasion of Cuba and I am confident that other nations of the Western Hemisphere would be prepared to do likewise.


Memorandum From Attorney General Kennedy to Secretary of State Rusk

He then asked me about Khrushchev's other proposal dealing with the removal of the missiles from Turkey. I replied that there could be no quid pro quo--no deal of this kind could be made. This was a matter that had to be considered by NATO and that it was up to NATO to make the decision. I said it was completely impossible for NATO to take such a step under the present threatening position of the Soviet Union.(2)
Per your instructions I repeated that there could be no deal of any kind and that any steps toward easing tensions in other parts of the world largely depended on the Soviet Union and Mr. Khrushchev taking action in Cuba and taking it immediately.
I repeated to him that this matter could not wait and that he had better contact Mr. Khrushchev and have a commitment from him by the next day to withdraw the missile bases under United Nations supervision for otherwise, I said, there would be drastic consequences.


No. 102. Message From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy

I regard with respect and trust the statement you made in your message of October 27, 1962, that there would be no attack, no invasion of Cuba, and not only on the part of the United States, but also on the part of other nations of the Western Hemisphere, as you said in your same message. Then the motives which induced us to render assistance of such a kind to Cuba disappear.
It is for this reason that we instructed our officers--these means as I had already informed you earlier are in the hands of the Soviet officers--to take appropriate measures to discontinue construction of the aforementioned facilities, to dismantle them, and to return them to the Soviet Union. As I had informed you in the letter of October 27,(2) we are prepared to reach agreement to enable United Nations Representatives to verify the dismantling of these means.
Thus in view of the assurances you have given and our instructions on dismantling, there is every condition for eliminating the present conflict.


No. 104. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the Soviet Union

I agree with you that we must devote urgent attention to the problem of disarmament, as it relates to the whole world and also to critical areas. Perhaps now, as we step back from danger, we can together make real progress in this vital field. I think we should give priority to questions relating to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, on earth and in outer space, and to the great effort for a nuclear test ban. But we should also work hard to see if wider measures of disarmament can be agreed and put into operation at an early date. The United States Government will be prepared to discuss these questions urgently, and in a constructive spirit, at Geneva or elsewhere.

JFK


No. 115. Telegram From the Embassy in the Soviet Union to the Department of State

1139. Policy. During courtesy call on Gromyko at 4:00 p.m. today, he introduced subject of Cuba, saying that Soviet Government wished as quickly as possible to reach agreement pursuant to Kennedy-Khrushchev exchange of letters. Agreement should "codify" obligations of both sides, i.e., US obligations to refrain from attack on Cuba and to rescind blockade, "which you call quarantine, but which we regard as inadmissible arbitrary act in peace-time"; Soviet obligation to remove weapons "which President called offensive"; and Cuban obligations. Agreement should stem from talks now going on at UN in New York. Soviet Government expects US will take steps to bring negotiations quickly to satisfactory end. Gromyko said he did not want to enter upon substantive discussion this matter now, just wanted to mention it in passing.
I said that, while I had no instructions discuss this subject, it was clear US Government desired and intended to proceed as swiftly as possible to overcome crisis. President regards exchange of letters with Khrushchev as constituting agreement on basic principles involved, on basis of which question was prompt execution of obligations. So far as speed of negotiations was concerned, the faster the better, but talk should not delay action.

Kohler


No. 120. Message From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy

On October 29 Dobrynin had given Robert Kennedy a different unsigned letter from Khrushchev to the President which spelled out the basis for agreement on Cuba. The Attorney General studied the letter over night before asking Dobrynin to come to his office on October 30 and take it back because it involved a quid pro quo. For an account of this incident, see Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Robert Kennedy and His Times, p. 546. No record of the October 30 meeting has been found. For text of the letter, see Foreign Relations, 1961-1963, vol. VI, Document 70.

The Cuban missile crisis was what, forty years ago? This is what we mean when we say US policy is stuck in the 1960's. What are you afraid of, Castro's going to bomb us with sugar cane?

for all concerned about sources for tactical nuclear weapons in Cuba, do a simple "tactical nuclear missiles" search on google, you idiot right-wingers. this isn't a conspiracy.

the "assumed to have 7" comment is from a PBS or Discovery Channel special on the Cuban Missile Crisis from the mid-90's, where they interviewed former Soviet military personnel involved in Cuba in the early 60's. look for it on your own.

like i said, a simple google search on tactical nukes will lead you to a lot of de-speculizing about your theories on why or why not the U.S. invaved or won't invade Cuba. the CIA did eventually find out about the tactical nukes, well after the Kennedy/Kruschev saga, and has never factually stated or determined that they all left Cuba. neither have the Soviets.

oh, another place i may have gotten this out of is the Fidel Castro special by Dan Rather a few years ago on CBS. there's some "source" for all you conspiracist ultra-moronic-patriotic right-wingers.

¡Venceremos!

Not while China is still around.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/8/14/174213.shtml