I recently visited the site of Che Guevara's grave in Santa Clara Cuba. There is no question the man had balls of titanium and incredible bravery. How the revolution succeeded in Cuba is quite astounding.

As to the rights and wrongs of it, Cuba had been screwed up forever as a victim of colonialism and US interference, and while the (US supported) regime of Batista was clearly not great for Cubans, of course dictatorships were the flavor of the day at the time, but all the Cuban people effectively got was one theocracy replaced with another one without the money. It seems they were probably about equal in brutality and human rights abuses at the time.

If there was such a revolutionary today who physically fought to overthrow the government there would be an outrage and depending where it was, global intervention. Of course that happened unsuccessfully at the Bay of Pigs. Again, I suppose it was not uncommon at the time and one mans hero / revolutionary / freedom fighter is anothers dissident / despot / thug.

However, I did get the sense from some of the older Cubans anyway that Guevara is genuinely revered in Cuba despite the economic conditions they are in.

Apart from his ideologies clearly not working out too well for Cuba, or elsewhere around the world, he is still regarded as a visionary and his face is globally recognized as a symbol of anti-capitalism or even just anti-right wing and 1000's of t-shirts etc are sold around the world. While for some it is just a fashion brand, no doubt for many he does represent a visionary hero and ideology, more than simply a very brave man heroic in battle.

Of course, he did not have any special affection for Cuba per se, it was "the revolution" and he wanted the same in in his homeland Argentina and ultimately globally, but unsuccessfully moved on to try and continue it in Congo then Bolivia first (where he was captured and executed - as an aside, our tour guide said it was on orders of the CIA, but other sources online seem to think it a summary action of the Bolivian military and the US thought it was an unwise thing to do and did not agree with what they did).

You could argue that Cuba's current economic conditions are not a direct result of Che's socialist vision, if it was not for Fidel messing around with the Soviet's, the missile crisis and resulting sanctions, who knows where Cuba would be today, maybe more like China.

Wondering what your thoughts are.

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): Che Guevara - Hero Or...?

He was an evil man whose ideologies have played a major role in the economic depression on Cuba for over half of a century now.

Guevara is a villain in the same mold as Lenin and Bin Laden: an economically comfortable and relatively well educated figure who convinced that poor and uneducated that they were being abused but ultimately screwing over the people they professed to care so much about.

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): However, I did get the sense from some of the older Cubans anyway that Guevara is genuinely revered in Cuba despite the economic conditions they are in.

The smart ones will figure it out. I'm in favor of ending sanctions just because that is what will destroy Communism entirely. This isn't a problem to solve with weapons. No Communist regime could hope to withstand a barrage of Nikes and iPods.

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): Apart from his ideologies clearly not working out too well for Cuba, or elsewhere around the world, he is still regarded as a visionary and his face is globally recognized as a symbol of anti-capitalism or even just anti-right wing and 1000's of t-shirts etc are sold around the world.

For as much as the intellectually bankrupt members of the Occupy movement and Jar Jar Sanders supporters love to complain about capitalism, I'd bet money that not a single one of them ever considered floating away on a pile of garbage to escape it.

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): Wondering what your thoughts are.

You conveniently leave out the murder and torture of countless people that he knew to be innocent - but that their deaths would serve to "encourager les autres". He was no better than Osama Bin Ladin. He tried everything he could to push Russia into launching the missiles that were in Cuba during the Missile crisis. He genuinely wanted a nuclear holocaust. The Soviet Union's refusal to launch caused Che to break from the USSR philosophically, believing that they were unwilling to do what it takes.

Whenever I see someone walk around with a Che t-shirt, I know I am looking at an ignorant moron who bought into the same sort of propaganda that elevated people like Stalin, Hitler, or Sung in the eyes of the uneducated. You want to beat the crap out of them, but what purpose would it serve? You can't fix stupid.

[Edited 2016-04-16 23:33:58]

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): intellectually bankrupt members

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): Jar Jar Sanders supporters

Here is what the mindless pinheads on the right are all about.

See how name calling is useless?

Occupy and Sanders supporters are telling people (who are missing the point) that Reaganomics and trickle down does not work. We were all supposed to get richer. Everything was supposed to get better. We were supposed to have roads smooth as glass, low crime, high paying jobs, everything was supposed to be better. And it is. For CEOs. For the rich. We had the rich and they did well all through the 1950s until the 1980s when they found they could buy Congress.

Che wanted to take everything further. He did not want wealth at all. If the mindless pinheads on the right would actually open their mind and read, they would understand that, unlike Che, we workers want what we had been told would happen: wealth trickling down to us. The wealthy can be wealthy. But us working two, three, four jobs when we were told we would be working not so hard for just as much.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): we were told we would be working not so hard for just as much.

Er... which Reaganomics exponents told you you weren't going have to work hard?

Definitely a hero. He fought for what he believed in, for justice and rights of ordinary working people, against American imperialism and ultimately died for his cause.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): He was an evil man whose ideologies have played a major role in the economic depression on Cuba for over half of a century now.

You know, what's great about Cuba (or Russia for that matter) in comparison to the US is that the country has actually some other values than money. The United States is nothing but pseudo democracy ruled by big business that couldn't care less about welfare of ordinary people. I think the American flag should be replaced with a big blank white flag that has a dollar sign on it, because that's all your country is nowadays.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):

Hey, all Che wanted was simply nuclear missiles on the Cuban soil to protect the country from American aggression, he didn't want an actual nuclear war to happen. It was Kennedy's unreasonable and aggressive reaction which almost caused a nuclear war, it's none of America's business where some country wants to store its nuclear weapons.

simple answer:

criminal Terrorist, or as an old Cuban who I met at work in NY, who was a wealthy business man in Cuba and worked as a Messenger in our company used to say: Assassino.

I admired Aristonigo A. not that communist who helped, together with the Castros, to suppress millions of Cubans till today.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): it's none of America's business where some country wants to store its nuclear weapons

Right. When the place they want their nuke weapons is "pointed at, and within easy reach of, America," that's none of our business.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.   

What Kennedy did was right. Krusthchev was pushing the Limits and Kennedy showed him the Limits. The world would look different today if he hadn't.

The other comparable decision by a US President was the NATO twin track decision. I am not so sure what Obama will do about Russian jets barreling over US ships or EC135 jets and I can only beg our US friends here not to vote Bernie Sanders into Office. And not Trump either, that would be a choice between devil and another evil.

.

Quoting Airstud (Reply 7): ight. When the place they want their nuke weapons is "pointed at, and within easy reach of, America," that's none of our business. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

While it was a foolish act by the Soviet leader, who had boasted of ICBM's being produced 'like sausages' the reality was the opposite, so for a quick and dirty way to cut the imbalance of nuclear forces, while at the same time exploiting that vast, ill informed, stupid, mobbed up attempt to overthrow Castro by the CIA at The Bay Of Pigs, the USSR did have plenty of IRBM's and shorter range nukes.
How could the US object when they had placed IRBM's in Italy, Germany, the UK and worst of all very close to the USSR in Turkey? Very close as could be seen through binoculars at the border.

At the time of the missile crisis most Americans had no conception of this real fear that the USSR had in relation to those missiles, most probably did not know that while no army, much less a bomber, had ever got near the USA in WW2, the USSR had lost 27 million people in that conflict.
Even fewer still knew that the US had a 17 to 1 advantage in strategic delivery systems, that is long range bombers and ICBM's.

As to Che, big ambitions but little success.
He soon fell out of favour with the regime in Cuba even if his revolutionary wanderlust hadn't taken over.
What is most startling about his post Cuba life was how little support he got from not only the Communist powers but others who you would expect to be allies.
So his demise was inevitable, that alone sold the famous image, had he lived probably not so much.
He might even be an obscure figure had he lived into old age.

If you want a hero of the left, try Tito.
Fought the Nazis, told Stalin where he could shove it, while a Communist he was rather more pragmatic than most. Yugoslavia had more freedoms, some free enterprise even and a higher standard of living than any Warsaw Pact state - which is why they all hated him.
Trouble was, Tito WAS post war Yugoslavia so it could not survive his death.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): Definitely a hero. He fought for what he believed in, for justice and rights of ordinary working people, against American imperialism and ultimately died for his cause.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): You know, what's great about Cuba (or Russia for that matter) in comparison to the US is that the country has actually some other values than money.

Hey, I thought you already grew up from being a delusional commie wannabe?

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): You could argue that Cuba's current economic conditions are not a direct result of Che's socialist vision

Of course they are direct result of his and Castro's failed socialist policies. Russian occupied half of Europe tried them in late 40s, any smart person would learn from bitter mistakes others made.

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): How the revolution succeeded in Cuba is quite astounding.

Indeed. The people risking their lives to flee the so called "Liberty" Island are a proof of that "success".

Quoting Airstud (Reply 7): Right. When the place they want their nuke weapons is "pointed at, and within easy reach of, America," that's none of our business.

If America has the right to place weapons systems to Europe I don't see why the Soviet Union shouldn't have the same right to place them into Cuba.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8): I am not so sure what Obama will do about Russian jets barreling over US ships or EC135 jets and I can only beg our US friends here not to vote Bernie Sanders into Office. And not Trump either, that would be a choice between devil and another evil.

As an European I don't have a problem with Russian jets barreling over US ships or aircraft. What I do have problem with is US government invading and destabilizing foreign countries, and forcing us Europeans to pay for the refugee crisis that happen as a result, not to even mention the rising terror threat in Europe.

US government's militarism and US style neoliberalism imported to the EU are destroying Europe. Now we need Russia and healthy nationalism to save the situation.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 10): Hey, I thought you already grew up from being a delusional commie wannabe?

I'm not a supporter of communism, but it's still better of a system than neoliberal capitalism which is screwing us all over. Social democracy is probably the best option as long as those in power think of their own people's and country's welfare first and foremost.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): See how name calling is useless?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): the mindless pinheads on the right

Hypocrisy at its best.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 11): As an European I don't have a problem with Russian jets barreling over US ships or aircraft. What I do have problem with is US government invading and destabilizing foreign countries, and forcing us Europeans to pay for the refugee crisis that happen as a result,

If you Europeans had not been so arrogant in your colonialism and subsequent decisions regarding map lines, much of the turmoil would not have happened. For example, I recommend you read modern Syrian history.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 12): If you Europeans had not been so arrogant in your colonialism and subsequent decisions regarding map lines, much of the turmoil would not have happened. For example, I recommend you read modern Syrian history.

I guess we should have done like you and just killed everybody before taking the land.

I'd suggest that people who never experienced living in a dictatorship should never start topics like this.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): Che wanted to take everything further. He did not want wealth at all.

Totally at odds with what I have been told by personal acquaintances who were there and intimately familiar with Fidel and Che prior to and during the revolution. Guevara appropriated by force all of the muniments of wealth he desired.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 6): criminal Terrorist, or as an old Cuban who I met at work in NY, who was a wealthy business man in Cuba and worked as a Messenger in our company used to say: Assassino.

True.

(None of this, by the way, is any defense of wrongful actions by the previous regime; but the whole discussion has a sort of "the enemy of my enemy must be my friend" feel to it).

Quoting mham001 (Reply 12): If you Europeans had not been so arrogant in your colonialism and subsequent decisions regarding map lines, much of the turmoil would not have happened. For example, I recommend you read modern Syrian history.

Admittedly true, blame the French, the British and so on for that, we Finns had no part in it, just like we played no part in Iraq war or supporting Islamist rebels in Syria and Libya. Yet we still suffer even more from these political failures than countries which actually caused them.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 16): we Finns had no part in it, just like we played no part in Iraq war or supporting Islamist rebels in Syria and Libya.

Many Americans did not support any intervention in the Middle East. But, because our government does/did, we citizens are labeled as such.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 15): Totally at odds with what I have been told by personal acquaintances who were there and intimately familiar with Fidel and Che prior to and during the revolution.

I should have added "for the people" instead of including Che in that. A typical lifestyle for dictators: do as I say, not as I do.

Che Guevara had some good ideas, but unfortunately he was one of those for whom all means are ok, as long as the final goal is lgitimate. As this he committed quite a few crimes yes, hat would today be considered war crimes). So, no, for me he is not a hero.

Jan

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): Occupy and Sanders supporters are telling people (who are missing the point) that Reaganomics and trickle down does not work.

It does work, you just forgot that we're at the top rather than the bottom. You should go look at China and India and see what trickle down economics has created.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3): We were all supposed to get richer. Everything was supposed to get better.

Everything has gotten better. Face it, my life, and I suspect yours as well, has much more in common with the life of Bill Gates or any other billionaire than it does with the life of an impoverished African for example. The idea that I'm supposed to be angry with 1%ers because my car is a Honda and theirs is a Bentley is ludicrous, especially when they had nothing to do with making me a 99%er.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): You know, what's great about Cuba (or Russia for that matter) in comparison to the US is that the country has actually some other values than money.

And Cubans love it so much they'll sit on top of anything that can float to get away from it and head for the capitalist hellscape up north.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8): What Kennedy did was right. Krusthchev was pushing the Limits and Kennedy showed him the Limits. The world would look different today if he hadn't.

  

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8): I am not so sure what Obama will do about Russian jets barreling over US ships

Having seen the video, I want to know why that plane was not shot down. It wasn't shadowing or circling the ship, that was a patently dangerous and threatening maneuver. I'd like to see an explanation for why such behavior did not draw a response in a post-USS Cole world.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8): I can only beg our US friends here not to vote Bernie Sanders into Office. And not Trump either, that would be a choice between devil and another evil.

  

Quoting pvjin (Reply 11): If America has the right to place weapons systems to Europe I don't see why the Soviet Union shouldn't have the same right to place them into Cuba.

Well that's where hard power comes into play. You can try, but you might get vaporized because of it.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 16): Yet we still suffer even more from these political failures than countries which actually caused them.

By "suffer" you mean that you may have to live in close proximity to people with brown skin who might speak a different language than you.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 18): Che Guevara had some good ideas, but unfortunately he was one of those for whom all means are ok, as long as the final goal is lgitimate. As this he committed quite a few crimes yes, hat would today be considered war crimes). So, no, for me he is not a hero.

Peaceful revolutions only happen in the dreams of philosophers.

If you don't want a revolution to happen, treat the people better. It's quite simple really.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19): Having seen the video, I want to know why that plane was not shot down. It wasn't shadowing or circling the ship, that was a patently dangerous and threatening maneuver. I'd like to see an explanation for why such behavior did not draw a response in a post-USS Cole world.

The US is a great "defender" of free access to international seas. How could they then claim that the air over their ships is prohibited ?

Quoting Aesma (Reply 20): Peaceful revolutions only happen in the dreams of philosophers.

The people of the former GDR would like a quiet word with you.  

Thanks for an interesting discussion, it just boggles my mind a little to see people walking around with Che t-shirts in 2016. As I say, for some it could mean no more than "I went to Cuba and got this lousy t-shirt", but I think it does go beyond that for others.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1): I'm in favor of ending sanctions just because that is what will destroy Communism entirely

Things are different in 2016 than 1962. The sanctions are BS and serve no purpose today.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2): You conveniently leave out the murder and torture of countless people that he knew to be innocent - but that their deaths would serve to "encourager les autres".

Thanks, yes, I could not include everything, though that what I was alluding to in this

Quoting YVRLTN (Thread starter): It seems they were probably about equal in brutality and human rights abuses at the time.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2): He tried everything he could to push Russia into launching the missiles that were in Cuba during the Missile crisis. He genuinely wanted a nuclear holocaust.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): Hey, all Che wanted was simply nuclear missiles on the Cuban soil to protect the country from American aggression, he didn't want an actual nuclear war to happen.

There could be debate one way or the other on this. My personal conclusion is he would not have given a rats ass had the US been nuked, particularly if it furthered his vision of the revolution.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2): The Soviet Union's refusal to launch caused Che to break from the USSR philosophically, believing that they were unwilling to do what it takes.

It became a high stakes poker game, everyone knew launching would end the world as they knew it and no one wanted that. But I dont think Soviet communism even was strong enough for Che, he was full on hard core Marxist extremist.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): He fought for what he believed in, for justice and rights of ordinary working people, against American imperialism and ultimately died for his cause.

That is a slippery slope to get on to, many evil people have died fighting for an evil cause they believed in, right up to the recent events in Brussels & Paris. The fact is, ordinary people did not get justice and rights and as Dreadnought said, those who did not co-operate were summarily executed. Of course that no longer happens in Cuba (that we know of).

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): You know, what's great about Cuba (or Russia for that matter) in comparison to the US is that the country has actually some other values than money

What are they? I certainly did notice a greater emphasis on family life for example, but you can not say that does not exist in the USA.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 5): It was Kennedy's unreasonable and aggressive reaction which almost caused a nuclear war, it's none of America's business where some country wants to store its nuclear weapons.

To have nuclear weapons show up on your doorstep should warrant an aggresive reaction. It is not unreasonable to want them to go away. Imagine if that happened in 2016 when the Dear Leader from DPRK set up shop with his fireworks on a Caribbean island. Or maybe you would be OK with it if he sent them to Tallinn and pointed then at Helsinki. That being said, this:

Quoting GDB (Reply 9): How could the US object when they had placed IRBM's in Italy, Germany, the UK and worst of all very close to the USSR in Turkey? Very close as could be seen through binoculars at the border.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 11): If America has the right to place weapons systems to Europe I don't see why the Soviet Union shouldn't have the same right to place them into Cuba.

Here I actually agree with you, as I say it was a high stakes game of poker and the USSR were not doing anything different than the US. The difference IMO was that Russia left to themselves would probably not do anything, but the Castro's and Che were unpredictable and an unknown, and particularly after the Bay of Pigs debacle, they had genuine cause to be directly pissed off at the USA.

It was not publicly known that the US had nukes all over pointed at the USSR and part of the crisis was that the hypocrisy was exposed and part of the deal was that JFK quietly removed them all back home. Well, at least moved them somewhere else...  

Quoting pvjin (Reply 11): What I do have problem with is US government invading and destabilizing foreign countries

The US is only a player in modern history. To stay on topic and not take an opportunity to bash the US, the root of Cuba's issues which led to successive regimes from Batista and Castro was colonialism, in this case Spain. Dont forget Jose Marti is also a national hero. And Spain cant take 100% of the blame, Britain and France were involved in Cuba too. OK, you can bash the US a little as they got involved too - Guatanamo... point being all that led to ripe conditions for Batista then Castro.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 11): I'm not a supporter of communism, but it's still better of a system than neoliberal capitalism which is screwing us all over.

I think maybe you should move to DPRK or Belarus.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 14): I'd suggest that people who never experienced living in a dictatorship should never start topics like this.

I respect your opinion and your past, I am happy that you made it to Canada. But I do think it is important to have these discussions so we learn from the past. Particularly for those who go around wearing Che t-shirts and have posters of him on their wall without giving too much thought what his vision applied really involved for persons like yourself.

Quoting GDB (Reply 9): As to Che, big ambitions but little success. He soon fell out of favour with the regime in Cuba even if his revolutionary wanderlust hadn't taken over.

My opinion is he was a useful tool for Fidel who helped him achieve his dream as a Cuban against incredible odds. I honestly think Fidel has been forever grateful to Che for that and whatever went on behind the scenes, I think the public stance as to him reflects this.

Anyway, it is going to be interesting what happens in the next 10 years in Cuba, both the Catro's will be gone or at least too senile to rule, relations with the US will be normalized and no one knows what will happen next as there is no clear successor of the party AFAIK. Hopefully there will be a peaceful transition akin to the Warsaw Pact countries after the fall of the USSR.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 20): The US is a great "defender" of free access to international seas. How could they then claim that the air over their ships is prohibited ?

This incident is not a matter of sovereignty but rather a matter of force protection. In light of past incidents, such as the USS Liberty and USS Cole, there should be a very, very good reason for the lack of response.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 22): As I say, for some it could mean no more than "I went to Cuba and got this lousy t-shirt"

More likely "I went to the mall and I got this lousy t-shirt."

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 22): Things are different in 2016 than 1962. The sanctions are BS and serve no purpose today.

That said, there should be liberalization but there should also be a small (small enough to not cause goods to become uncompetitive) tariff placed on Cuban goods and services as restitution for American assets stolen during the revolution. Once Cuba makes restitution the tariff should be removed.

Quoting aloges (Reply 21): Quoting Aesma (Reply 20): Peaceful revolutions only happen in the dreams of philosophers. The people of the former GDR would like a quiet word with you.

As the ones in Portugal, back in 1974.

Jan

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 22): JFK quietly removed them all back home. Well, at least moved them somewhere else...

He had ordered dismantled well before the crisis, since their role had been taken over by the first Polaris subs now on station, so JFK was surprised and angered when the USSR brought the Turkish bases up in the talks.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23): This incident is not a matter of sovereignty but rather a matter of force protection. In light of past incidents, such as the USS Liberty and USS Cole, there should be a very, very good reason for the lack of response.

I'll bet the SU-24's made it clear that they were unarmed by overflying the ship before starting to buzz it. There were something like 20 low passes.

And what response are you referring to? Shooting it down? Realize that would have severe consequences for any US military hardware that gets anywhere near Russia?

Quoting tu204 (Reply 26): I'll bet the SU-24's made it clear that they were unarmed by overflying the ship before starting to buzz it.

In this case that is not really relevant. There are low passes, and then there is this. No visual inspection can verify that the cannon the Su-24 is equipped with is not loaded. Secondly, obviously the Navy is safe if the aircraft is visually unarmed because the US Navy has never fallen victim to a suicide attack before.

Quoting tu204 (Reply 26): And what response are you referring to? Shooting it down?

Precisely. The aircraft posed a real and imminent threat to the ship. It has nothing to do with it being Russian or a military jet. A Cessna doing the same should be dealt with the same.

Quoting tu204 (Reply 26): Realize that would have severe consequences for any US military hardware that gets anywhere near Russia?

I doubt it.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23): More likely "I went to the mall and I got this lousy t-shirt."

For Americans, yes  

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23): as restitution for American assets stolen during the revolution. Once Cuba makes restitution the tariff should be removed.

What? What right do Americans have over Cuba? It was the choice of those who went there to go there. The purpose being to load their pockets at the expense of Cuban farmers primarily. Case of wrong place, wrong time, too bad, too sad.

Then theres Guatanamo which still belongs to the Americans. How about the Americans give that back and call it quits.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23): tariff placed on Cuban goods

In reality we are talking about rum and cigars for the foreseeable, both of which are more than sufficiently dutiable.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19): that was a patently dangerous and threatening maneuver

One done at an airshow every week. Flyovers happen in international waters all the time, I dont see why adding a fancy roll to show off deserves the killing of the pilot.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): What? What right do Americans have over Cuba?

Americans owned property and assets in Cuba and they were stolen during the revolution.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): Case of wrong place, wrong time, too bad, too sad.

Lack of respect for property rights demands punishment. That's like the government saying they can't do anything because you wandered down the wrong street and got robbed.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): One done at an airshow every week.

I bet the safety rules at every airshow in the world preclude doing what the Russians did.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): Flyovers happen in international waters all the time,

This was not a normal flyover.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 13): I guess we should have done like you and just killed everybody before taking the land.

LOL, "we" were also Europeans.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 29): Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): Case of wrong place, wrong time, too bad, too sad. Lack of respect for property rights demands punishment. That's like the government saying they can't do anything because you wandered down the wrong street and got robbed.

A lot of this property was actually stolen from the Cubans after the Spanish-American war (just like in the Philippines). The constitution pressed on the nominally independent Cubans gave the US massive right on intervention in internal matters in Cuba. The Filipinos were not as lucky, they became and official colony, and the landgrab by American companies is the reason why foreigners are not allowed to own land there or can be in control of companies.

Jan

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19): And Cubans love it so much they'll sit on top of anything that can float to get away from it and head for the capitalist hellscape up north.

Haitians and people from Dominican Republic would be doing the same if floating to Florida would give them instant asylum and eventual US citizenship. And look at those Mexicans who illegally sneak over the border to the US, why are they doing that if capitalism is so good to them?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19): By "suffer" you mean that you may have to live in close proximity to people with brown skin who might speak a different language than you.

No, I mean having our social security, state funded education and healthcare getting bankrupted by tens of thousands of refugees who don't have any realistic chance of finding employment in this country. Many of them also hold no respect whatsoever to our culture and laws, crime statistics prove that.

Obviously none of this would be a problem in your ideal society where social security and state funded services (apart from huge military and police forces) don't exist and you can just lock all criminals to prisons owned by private companies.

I would rather have a social democracy without these people than a horrible libtard wet dream with them. But yes, I can certainly understand why you are pro mass migration, it helps tearing down European welfare states so that the 1% can have even more money and everybody else will have less.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 22): I think maybe you should move to DPRK or Belarus.

Belarus could do, DPRK is too extreme. The weather sucks though, so something like Cuba would be nicer.

[Edited 2016-04-17 13:58:04]

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 28): What right do Americans have over Cuba? It was the choice of those who went there to go there. The purpose being to load their pockets at the expense of Cuban farmers primarily. Case of wrong place, wrong time, too bad, too sad.

What if it was YOUR property being stolen? Would you just say "wrong time, too bad, too sad" and that's it. My grandparents experienced this firsthand when the communists came to power through coup in 1948. Farm their ancestors built for generations stolen through one signature and turn into collective farm only to be returned as a ruin 40 years later. They were lucky they did not end up in prison like many others.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 31): A lot of this property was actually stolen from the Cubans after the Spanish-American war (just like in the Philippines).

Feel free to find a source showing that the US stole oil refineries after the Spanish American War.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 31): The constitution pressed on the nominally independent Cubans gave the US massive right on intervention in internal matters in Cuba.

With the benefit of a century of hindsight, the right path would have been to have stayed in Cuba and put them on a path towards statehood.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 32): Haitians and people from Dominican Republic would be doing the same if floating to Florida would give them instant asylum and eventual US citizenship.

I'm sure Cuba would be happy to have them.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 32): And look at those Mexicans who illegally sneak over the border to the US, why are they doing that if capitalism is so good to them?

Market forces. America has demand in excess of supply for their labor.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 32): No, I mean having our social security, state funded education and healthcare getting bankrupted by tens of thousands of refugees who don't have any realistic chance of finding employment in this country.

So you're just a racist then.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): I'm sure Cuba would be happy to have them.

I don't think they have need for such an amount of extra workforce.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): Market forces. America has demand in excess of supply for their labor.

Yes, and market forces drive people from Cuba to the US. They aren't legitimate refugees, nobody threatens their life.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): So you're just a racist then.

And the US government is racist for not letting anybody who wants to live in the US in and giving them an instant citizenship. Fix your own country before blaming others for racism, let anybody who wants to live in your society in. Let the market forces sort it out.

Ask 50 people and there will be 50 opinions. My take is he, like many people, started with good intentions and motives. Once successful, the oppressed became the oppressor. I can provide many examples but it will just divert attention from the topic at hand. I liken him to a "one hit wonder" who was in the right place at the right time with the Cuban Revolution. Once he got a taste of power, he became no better than those he helped over thrown. He spent the rest of his short life looking for another "chart topping hit" only to fall way short.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 35): Yes, and market forces drive people from Cuba to the US. They aren't legitimate refugees, nobody threatens their life.

They're escaping a regime that has a history of property and human rights violations.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 35): And the US government is racist for not letting anybody who wants to live in the US in and giving them an instant citizenship.

I don't think so, but feel free to explain which of your rights is infringed by a Muslim going to the mosque or speaking Arabic.

Secondly, Cubans do not get instant citizenship. Third, it does not apply to just anyone from Cuba, the definition is actually somewhat more restrictive but due to the brutality and disregard of the Cuban regime towards human rights, it ends up covering a lot of cases, if not all of them.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): With the benefit of a century of hindsight, the right path would have been to have stayed in Cuba and put them on a path towards statehood.

Like Puerto Rico ?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37): They're escaping a regime that has a history of property and human rights violations.

So? The majority of world's current regimes have a history of human rights violations, many of them much worse than those of current Cuban regime. Yet your country doesn't seem to be taking many refugees from those countries.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37): I don't think so, but feel free to explain which of your rights is infringed by a Muslim going to the mosque or speaking Arabic.

None if they respect our laws and don't abuse the welfare system.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37): Secondly, Cubans do not get instant citizenship. Third, it does not apply to just anyone from Cuba, the definition is actually somewhat more restrictive but due to the brutality and disregard of the Cuban regime towards human rights, it ends up covering a lot of cases, if not all of them.

Cuban regime isn't particularly brutal or disregarding towards human rights by Latin American standards. The reality is very different from US propaganda.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 31): The constitution pressed on the nominally independent Cubans gave the US massive right on intervention in internal matters in Cuba. With the benefit of a century of hindsight, the right path would have been to have stayed in Cuba and put them on a path towards statehood.

Cuba, like the Philippines had already an independence movement working towards a democracy against the Spanish colonial power back then, but he powers that were in the US back then decided that running a nation can't be trusted tobrownskinned people. Plus they might compete e.g. in growing sugar cane or rice with American plantation owners. So better colonialise them, just like Hawaii at the same time. Fortunately there were some prominent Americans, like Mark Twain against this imperialism.

Read some history books.

Jan

Quoting Aesma (Reply 38): Like Puerto Rico ?

It probably should have been done with Puerto Rico at the time as well. These days it's a bit more complicated but I'd be perfectly happy to see them join the union as a state.

Remember that at the time of the Spanish-American War the US only had 45 states and six other states had been states for less than a decade.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 39): The majority of world's current regimes have a history of human rights violations, many of them much worse than those of current Cuban regime.

And it's bad to try and do something about it? Is there a Communist or socialist regime that you won't make excuses for? Remember that Communism only survives with the protection of brutality and authoritarianism.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 39): None if they respect our laws and don't abuse the welfare system.

How do they abuse the welfare system? Aren't they just getting what the system says they should get?

And you should know that pointing to crime statistics to excuse your racist views is straight from the skinhead playbook.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 40): Cuba, like the Philippines had already an independence movement working towards a democracy against the Spanish colonial power back then, but he powers that were in the US back then decided that running a nation can't be trusted tobrownskinned people.

This ignores that the US actively supported Cuban independence efforts.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 40): Plus they might compete e.g. in growing sugar cane or rice with American plantation owners.

Most Cuban sugar was exported to America. The issue was the Spanish exercising political authority in an economically important place to the Americans.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41): And it's bad to try and do something about it? Is there a Communist or socialist regime that you won't make excuses for? Remember that Communism only survives with the protection of brutality and authoritarianism.

Yes, it's bad to make Cuba look worse than it really is when at the same time supporting way worse regimes. American capitalism only survives with the protection of brutality and authoritarianism, your country has the highest per-capita incarceration rate from all major countries.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41): How do they abuse the welfare system? Aren't they just getting what the system says they should get?

Well technically speaking yes, the system was created in times when Finland was less multicultural and more honest of a country. That's why the system should change before it collapses due to cultural enrichment. A good model would be the one where you would need to do some work for the government in return for welfare.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41): And you should know that pointing to crime statistics to excuse your racist views is straight from the skinhead playbook.

Calling anybody who disagrees you a racist isn't a good way to win an argument. The truth is that I don't give a damn about race, so I can't be a racist. I may think a certain religion or culture is somewhat rubbish, that doesn't make me a racist either, nor does stating factual statistics in support of my arguments.

Try using some other word for a change. Nazi, fascist, racist, islamophobic, those are all meaningless throwaway words nowadays. Something fancy like "eurocentrist" would sound much more interesting. Calling me a filthy pro Russian communist would work too now that we are living in middle of a little cold war again.

[Edited 2016-04-17 15:31:21]

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41): Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 40): Cuba, like the Philippines had already an independence movement working towards a democracy against the Spanish colonial power back then, but he powers that were in the US back then decided that running a nation can't be trusted tobrownskinned people. This ignores that the US actively supported Cuban independence efforts.

They definitely did not in the Philippines and fought a long war against the insurgents, who originally fought the Spaniards and thought the US to be a liberator.

And in Cuba the US actively contravened the independence movements under Céspedes and Martí. In 1906 the US occupied Cuba "to protect American interests" and had it run by an American governor. American interests were always first. BS about supporting Cuban independence. It was all about getting access to the Cuban markets as consumers and to prevent Cuba from becoming a competitor.

Jan

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): American capitalism only survives with the protection of brutality and authoritarianism

...that and an influx of Cubans who arrive to escape Communism. Again, find me one person who floated away on a less than seaworthy contraption of junk to escape capitalism.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): Well technically speaking yes, the system was created in times when Finland was less multicultural and more honest of a country.

That's what I thought. What you actually mean is that the system was created for white people.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): Calling anybody who disagrees you a racist isn't a good way to win an argument.

Not anybody. Just the ones like you who start each post by saying that you're not a racist and then fill up the remainder of the post by saying all sorts of racist things.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): The truth is that I don't give a damn about race, so I can't be a racist.

So you think that prejudice based on religion, language or lifestyle is somehow not as bad?

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): Calling me a filthy pro Russian communist would work too now that we are living in middle of a little cold war again.

You're that too.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 42): Calling me a filthy pro Russian communist would work too now that we are living in middle of a little cold war again

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41): This ignores that the US actively supported Cuban independence efforts.

So why did they enable a dictator to come into power - and subsequently support him?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34): With the benefit of a century of hindsight, the right path would have been to have stayed in Cuba and put them on a path towards statehood.

Where do you stop with that? Why not incorporate all the Caribbean island nations into statehood? And Baja California, Sonora, Ontario... the fact is that Cubans are not indigenous people just like most Americans, Mexicans and Canadians are not and none of the land going back 500 years belongs to any of them. So they are all in the same boat in that regard.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 33): What if it was YOUR property being stolen? Would you just say "wrong time, too bad, too sad" and that's it. My grandparents experienced this firsthand when the communists came to power through coup in 1948

I assume your grandparents were Czechs and owned Czech land. Why were Americans owning Cuban land in the first place? Where did they get the property from? They had no right to be in Cuba more than anyone else has the right to emigrate somewhere should they chose to do so legally. What happened was they came in and made money at the expense of the people who were already there. Which was one of the things Fidel & Che wanted to fix. Batista was all for exporting the wealth at the expense of Cubans as long as his bank account was full in the process, and thats why he allowed rich Americans to take ownership of Cuban property. If it meant he was going to be buddy buddy with the worlds largest superpower, even better. Socialism goes against all of that in theory, until day 2 of getting into parliament and everyone is equal except some of course (Animal Farm, George Orwell). Respectfully not knowing your grandparents story, this seems a little different than the the circumstances they endured in Czechoslovakia as they were the rightful owners of what they lost to the communists. The American traders in Cuba were not exactly, not that they were illegals, they were pawns in Batista's game plan and willingly entered into partnership with a fascist regime for their own enrichment and willingly accepted assets that belonged to someone else to do so.

Quoting bluejuice (Reply 36): Ask 50 people and there will be 50 opinions. My take is he, like many people, started with good intentions and motives. Once successful, the oppressed became the oppressor. I can provide many examples but it will just divert attention from the topic at hand. I liken him to a "one hit wonder" who was in the right place at the right time with the Cuban Revolution. Once he got a taste of power, he became no better than those he helped over thrown. He spent the rest of his short life looking for another "chart topping hit" only to fall way short.

Thanks for getting back on topic, an interesting analogy. The good intentions and motives part is questionable though IMO.

Quoting GDB (Reply 25): He had ordered dismantled well before the crisis, since their role had been taken over by the first Polaris subs now on station, so JFK was surprised and angered when the USSR brought the Turkish bases up in the talks.

Im not sure on the timeframes, we are not talking about a long time in the grand scheme of things anyway. Nonetheless, the hypocrisy had been exposed and was a valid argument. Any way, I do not buy that every single land based nuke was removed.

[Edited 2016-04-17 17:11:53]

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 46): Thanks for getting back on topic, an interesting analogy. The good intentions and motives part is questionable though IMO.

No problem at all.

From my understanding of Che based on writings positive and negative about his legacy, it seems the idealism of youth was genuine. Latin America and the Caribbean at the time were full of corruption. Seems many in their 20s, myself included, take on causes that we believe are just and provide answers to all the worlds ills. Looking back, boy was I an idiot. I'm sure Guevara was very much the same. Being part of the successful Cuban Revolution seemed to have afforded him political power along the lines of the "Peter Principle." He was way in over his head trying to build his ideal communist utopia. His economic policies only somewhat worked due to support from Soviet and Eastern European support.

The world is seldom black and white but shades of gray. Once in power, he suppressed and jailed or executed dissenters very much like those in the Batista regime, A cult of personality was built around him. It seem the idea that those in Cuba love him is like those in North Korea worshiping the Kims. When you are told your entire life someone is a hero, you tend to believe it.

Quoting bluejuice (Reply 47): it seems the idealism of youth was genuine

Quite possibly, just the fact his nickname is Che is because he was probably a decent enough guy - but only if you were on the same page as him.

Quoting bluejuice (Reply 47): His economic policies only somewhat worked due to support from Soviet and Eastern European support.

Absolutely. The fact that Cuba was pretty much brought to its knees with the fall of the USSR and Warsaw Pact is proof of this. To this day, there are many unfinished projects commenced in the 80's with Soviet funding. It seems the 90's were one of the bleakest periods in recent history and Cuba had to pretty much revert to subsistence farming to survive. In recent times the Castro's have become friendlier with the whole world and there is now recovery in the economy, I would say China has largely replaced the role of the USSR and of course they get oil from their buddy Chavez, but they do now enjoy better ties with the rest of the world and also import from the likes of Brazil, Canada, Korea and Spain too.

Quoting bluejuice (Reply 47): A cult of personality was built around him. It seem the idea that those in Cuba love him is like those in North Korea worshiping the Kims. When you are told your entire life someone is a hero, you tend to believe it.

True. its rther anecdotal, but when I was there last month, we had two very different tour guides. One was maybe early 50's and very much towed the party line. The other was 31 years old, he had completed a thesis at university (which he did not pay for) on the effect of the restoration of relations with the USA. What struck me the most, despite never having left Cuba, he knew exactly what the rest of the world was all about and all the stuff they dont have and made no secret of the fact that even Fidel himself has stated that communism only works in theory, not in practice. So it is not like its some totalitarian police state and the media and access to the outside world is suppressed like DPRK or even China. Despite all that, he still had mixed emotions on the benefits to Cuba of opening up to America after studying the subject, there were certainly some cons to go with the pros.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 31): The Filipinos were not as lucky, they became and official colony, and the landgrab by American companies is the reason why foreigners are not allowed to own land there or can be in control of companies.

Bullshit. First, they had already been an official colony of Spain for 300 years. Second, there was no landgrab by American corporations, although there some call for it in 1901, but US labor and sugar interests were afraid and in 1902 the Land Act by the US Congress set a limit of 16 hectares of land to be sold or leased to American individuals and 1,024 hectares to American corporations.

The foreign restrictions were actually aimed at the Spanish (notice a pattern here?), who had given large sums to the Catholic Church, and still controlled by Spanish clerics after the Spanish-American war. This was a problem for the US and in 1902, passed the Organic Act (constitution) procliaming the protection of Philippine recources. In 1904, the US government bought most of the church holdings and sold it back to Filipinos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reform_in_the_Philippines

To imply it is a restriction by Filipinos because of US intrusion is mis-informtion. It is simply a vestige of European colonial greed.