Fidel Castro dies aged 90

Raoul said:
So in essence you admit that Castro wasn't all that after all. Progress.
Click to expand...

As in I don't idolise him? No, but again I haven't idolised a leader since Egypt's Nasser (who was well before my time anyway).

I will remember him though as a benevolent revolutionary who did more for the poor of his country than any Western power has done in the latter half of last century and onwards. As to how good of a leader he was in power is also debateable.
 
JustAFan said:
Is it right to paint all the Cuban's expats as rich elitist 1%ers? A lot came over with nothing and if they got rich in the US then good for them.
Click to expand...

It would be unfair to generalise of course.

But bear in mind a lot of those came with nothing because many were members of Cuba's elite, that often had links to Batista's regime or were running crony and exploitative ventures which Castro had deprived them off, prompting them to escape to the Capitalist haven up north.
 
Kaos said:
It would be unfair to generalise of course.

But bear in mind a lot of those came with nothing because many were members of Cuba's elite, that often had links to Batista's regime or were running crony and exploitative ventures which Castro had deprived them off, prompting them to escape to the Capitalist haven up north.
Click to expand...

Property ownership being the main one.
 
bleedred said:
Whats your source on that?.

Even if it's right, which I don't think so, Eisenhower snubbed him way before that in 1959 and had placed embargo on cuba.

Soviet- Cuba relations only strengthened after the Bay of pigs invasion (1961). As I said, before that, KGB had no idea on him and they thought he was a US Puppet.
Click to expand...
Technically my source is that I studied the history of the USSR in university, but if you want a link...
http://www.coha.org/cuba-russia-now-and-then/

The rest of what you say doesn't attack my point at all though. Castro was helping along the USSR's expansionist policy by allowing them to put nukes on the island.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
Property ownership being the main one.
Click to expand...

Casinos, Prostitution rackets and fronts for the Havana mob, all while the majority of Cubans were lucky to get a daily meal or see a Doctor once a year. Forgive me for my heart not bleeding.
 
Unmutual said:
As a proud leftie, I cant think of anything more damaging to the left wing movement than to suggest, in any way whatsoever, that Cuba was socialism working well. We can't let people think the murder & oppression of tens of thousands of political opponents, trade union leaders and gay people is a price worth paying for a decent NHS or school system.
Click to expand...
Exactly!
 


Well, at least he had regrets.
 
Kaos said:
Not an expanionist policy. The Russians had their deterrent a few miles off US soil, and the Cubans would probably feel more assured there wouldn't be another audacious Bay of Pigs style attempt.
Click to expand...
You don't see basing Soviet nuclear weapons into another hemisphere (90 miles off the coast of your rival) as expansionist?
 
Carolina Red said:
You don't see basing nuclear weapons into another hemisphere (90 miles off the coast of your rival) as expansionist?
Click to expand...

At the blessing of the country's sovereign government. There was no regime change, no Russian soldiers ammassing, and you'd argue it was to the benefit of Cuban's foreign policy too. This was just the usual macabre Cold War maneuvering.

By your logic, the US was being equally expanionist in Turkey.
 
Quite sickening that people defend him and in some cases celebrate him.

Unmutual said:
As a proud leftie, I cant think of anything more damaging to the left wing movement than to suggest, in any way whatsoever, that Cuba was socialism working well. We can't let people think the murder & oppression of tens of thousands of political opponents, trade union leaders and gay people is a price worth paying for a decent NHS or school system.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Did Castro's regime ever work? My mother used to tell me that it worked for a while. I'm not historically in the know enough to have an idea if this is remotely true.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Did Castro's regime ever work? My mother used to tell me that it worked for a while. I'm not historically in the know enough to have an idea if this is remotely true.
Click to expand...

Depends by which metric you deem something to 'work', also depends on who you ask. A poor Cuban would give you a very different outlook to a rich Havana casino owner.

But regardless its impossible to really have given it a fair measure of success considering the sanctions that Cuba was burdened with.
 
2cents said:
I don't know about universal healthcare, but the regime of Muhammad Reza Shah in Iran had some remarkable achievements in improving the lives of average Iranians - land redistribution, women's rights, literacy programs, etc. You will never see that regime being praised by the same people who seem to be revere Castro for his healthcare program, which seems to suggest most people don't judge these things on actual achievements but more in where said regime stood in the Cold War (and, in fairness, it could be argued that Iran might have achieved the same or more under Mossadegh, although we'll never know).
Click to expand...

Didn't Mossadegh start off as an anti-communist liberal?
 

"Cuban president Raul Castro believes Donald Trump is a brutal sociopath, hopes the US can eventually move to "free future" :D
 
Kaos said:
At the blessing of the country's sovereign government. There was no regime change, no Russian soldiers ammassing, and you'd argue it was to the benefit of Cuban's foreign policy too. This was just the usual macabre Cold War maneuvering.

By your logic, the US was being equally expanionist in Turkey.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I know they were. I never said the US wasn't.

Those defending Castro keep making that assumption today...
 
Carolina Red said:
Technically my source is that I studied the history of the USSR in university, but if you want a link...
http://www.coha.org/cuba-russia-now-and-then/

The rest of what you say doesn't attack my point at all though. Castro was helping along the USSR's expansionist policy by allowing them to put nukes on the island.
Click to expand...

Which happened first?. Plot to overthrow Castro or Cuba enabling soviet expansionism??. Your initial argument was that Cuba didn't help themselves by enabling soviet expansionism, to which I replied, They were forced into it because of previous embargos and Soviet were initially hesitant and were only real "allies" after bay of pigs... Is that not right? .. or is it the case that the trade deals Cuba signed with Soviet in 60 was a sign of expansionism already??
 
Kaos said:
Casinos, Prostitution rackets and fronts for the Havana mob, all while the majority of Cubans were lucky to get a daily meal or see a Doctor once a year. Forgive me for my heart not bleeding.
Click to expand...

So basically he replaced Casinos and property ownership with Totalitarianism. The party atmosphere in Little Havana is starting to make more sense now.
 
Carolina Red said:
Yeah. I know they were. I never said the US wasn't.

Those defending Castro keep making that assumption today...
Click to expand...

See I don't consider the US's missile program in Turkey as expanionist, merely reactive Cold War politics. The 50 or so countries it helped overthrow since 1945 perhaps, but not Turkey.

But again it seems we have differing opinions on what constitutes an expanionist policy.
 
Kaos said:
Depends by which metric you deem something to 'work', also depends on who you ask. A poor Cuban would give you a very different outlook to a rich Havana casino owner.

But regardless its impossible to really have given it a fair measure of success considering the sanctions that Cuba was burdened with.
Click to expand...
I'm quite sure she had the impoverished Cubans in mind.
 
Kaos said:
See I don't consider the US's missile program in Turkey as expanionist, merely reactive Cold War politics. The 50 or so countries it helped overthrow since 1945 perhaps, but not Turkey.

But again it seems we have differing opinions on what constitutes an expanionist policy.
Click to expand...
Putting military bases in other countries, especially ones containing nuclear missile launch sites = expansionism to me.
 
Carolina Red said:
I'm sure it had nothing to do with helping the USSR's expansionist (imperialist) goals
Click to expand...

From what I've read: Castro turned to the Soviets only after relations with the US broke down. And compared to the US, Soviet territorial expansion was much more limited in ambition (their main aim was colonising their neighbours to maintain a defensive ring, and they were often reluctant to fully finance and back the coups that the west carried out). Castro was a convenient acquisition for them when they realised the MAD balance was gone because the US could strike from as close as Turkey.
 
Carolina Red said:
Putting military bases in other countries, especially ones containing nuclear missile launch sites = expansionism to me.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I was going by the metric of uninvited interventions, i.e overthrowing regimes - democratic or otherwise.
 
bleedred said:
Which happened first?. Plot to overthrow Castro or Cuba enabling soviet expansionism??. Your initial argument was that Cuba didn't help themselves by enabling soviet expansionism, to which I replied, They were forced into it because of previous embargos and Soviet were initially hesitant and were only real "allies" after bay of pigs... Is that not right? .. or is it the case that the trade deals Cuba signed with Soviet in 60 was a sign of expansionism already??
Click to expand...
I do see the Soviet economic policy toward Cuba beginning in 1960 as the beginning of its expansion into the island. They saw the opportunity of having a Communist state in the Western Hemisphere and immediately began buoying its economy. Cuba was almost solely dependent on the USSR for its economy to function and the USSR began making demands of Cuba... It was after this economic meddling that Castro came out and declared his government as Marxist-Leninist.

Also, the lack of true benevolence toward Castro becomes apparent in the fact that Khrushchev never involved Castro in the negotiations with Kennedy in regards to removing the missile sites from Cuba. The Soviets pulled out without ever asking Castro's opinion. Khrushchev had made a play to create a big nuclear sub out of Cuba and the play failed, so he left Castro high and dry in the matter without ever talking to him about it.
 
berbatrick said:
From what I've read: Castro turned to the Soviets only after relations with the US broke down. And compared to the US, Soviet territorial expansion was much more limited in ambition (their main aim was colonising their neighbours to maintain a defensive ring, and they were often reluctant to fully finance and back the coups that the west carried out). Castro was a convenient acquisition for them when they realised the MAD balance was gone because the US could strike from as close as Turkey.
Click to expand...
So they replaced the governments of other countries with puppets and colonized them... And Castro was part of that policy.
 
Carolina Red said:
I do see the Soviet economic policy toward Cuba beginning in 1960 as the beginning of its expansion into the island. They saw the opportunity of having a Communist state in the Western Hemisphere and immediately began buoying its economy. Cuba was almost solely dependent on the USSR for its economy to function and the USSR began making demands of Cuba... It was after this economic meddling that Castro came out and declared his government as Marxist-Leninist.

Also, the lack of true benevolence toward Castro becomes apparent in the fact that Khrushchev never involved Castro in the negotiations with Kennedy in regards to removing the missile sites from Cuba. The Soviets pulled out without ever asking Castro's opinion. Khrushchev had made a play to create a big nuclear sub out of Cuba and the play failed, so he left Castro high and dry in the matter without ever talking to him about it.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly... Thats why I argued on your initial statement.
I'm sure it had nothing to do with helping the USSR's expansionist (imperialist) goals
Click to expand...

Because he had literally no say in it. He could not have survived without USSR and his hand was forced. I certainly believe he would have preferred to stay away from either if he could have survived the embargoes.
 
bleedred said:
Yes, exactly... Thats why I argued on your initial statement.


Because he had literally no say in it. He could not have survived without USSR and his hand was forced. I certainly believe he would have preferred to stay away from either if he could have survived the embargoes.
Click to expand...
Possibly, Castro was known to be keen on the deployment as it would protect his regime. At the same time, going back to my initial statement on the Crisis... Soviet nukes in Cuba certainly did not help US-Cuban relations. There's a reason the embargo is still on, and I'd say those nukes are a big part of that.
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
Possibly, Castro was known to be keen on the deployment as it would protect his regime. At the same time, going back to my initial statement on the Crisis... Soviet nukes in Cuba certainly did not help US-Cuban relations. There's a reason the embargo is still on, and I'd say those nukes are a big part of that.
Click to expand...

The nukes were just a perfect excuse. The reason was a communist country in your backyard, and the fear of it spreading to your colonies.
 
Carolina Red said:
Except that Castro was the one to make the request to have the missiles based in Cuba
Click to expand...

There are multiple versions of that story with some stating he objected initially..
Edit: will post sources. read it long back...will try to find it.

So there are three versions of it.

1) Castro requested

2) Khruschev suggested and castro agreed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...is-1962-the-world-at-deaths-door-1555622.html

3) Castro denied and khruschev convinced him.

Hard Right Turn: Jerry Carrier
accounts of Sergo mikoyan, son on Anton, who mediated the ties between cuba and Soviet.
 
Last edited:
I read somewhere that the Soviets were keen to have those missiles there in response to NATO putting missiles in Turkey. While at the time having them removed was seen as an NATO victory, in fact they secretly agreed to reomove the ones in Turkey in compensation.

From a geopolitical perspective it is has to be said that the USSR was encircled almost totally by NATO at this point and was about to start its Cold War with China.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.