The beginning of the end for Fidel?

[Ned]

The linked story reports that Eloy Gutierrez Menoyo has returned to Cuba to stay and will work for democratic reform. He is a former anti-Bastista commander who himself revolted against Castro. He seems generally dedicated to democracy, but he is also anti-American.

Who is this guy and does he represent real hope for Cuba?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americas/08/07/cuba.exile/index.html

[mrmitchell]

Probably not. Castro, as has been observed, is immortal. He will only Ascend when He chooses.

it could be a while

(Seriously, still, no.)

[Ned]

Che, I hope you respond to my question - who is this man? He was, after all, part of the revolution.

[GePap]

Other fellow members of the group that overturned Batista have broken with Castro long ago.

He is no more a threat than any of the current dissidents.

[Ned]

GePap, but why in the world would he be both anti-Castro and anti-American as well? Where does this lead?

[Odin]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, but why in the world would he be both anti-Castro and anti-American as well? Where does this lead?

The US won't let him form a democratic government and will set up a Batista-like dicatorship so US corporation can pay thier workers 10 cents per day. Sadly, I fear the US will do the same as the did in many other contries, set up a pro-US dictator to make it free for corporate greed.

[lord of the mark]

I predicted way back in 1993 that Fidel woould fall within a couple of years.

Ive given up on the Fidel guessing game

[Jack the Bodiless]

Why should a Cuban, even an anti-Castro one, NOT be anti-American?

The US backed the Batista regime. After it fell, the US attempted to claim ownership of Cuban assets: the assets of investment in that regime. Cubans understandably feel that they deserve those assets, and this was a major factor in the falling-out between Cuba and the US, and the subsequent economic sanctions against Cuba.

Many Cubans feel that they don't owe the US one cent (if anything, the US owes them reparations).

The sanctions, and the claim on Cuban assets, were a political bungle of monumental proportions by the US. And as long as this madness continues, plenty of Cubans will be anti-American.

[DanS]

Why should a Cuban, even an anti-Castro one, NOT be anti-American?

This is funny. This guy has been living in Florida raising a family for the last couple of decades and he's anti-American?

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

[monolith94]

Nice selective quoting, DanS. And besides, living in western civilization has never implied a love for it. Hell, just look at Osama Bin Laden.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless
Why should a Cuban, even an anti-Castro one, NOT be anti-American?

The US backed the Batista regime. After it fell, the US attempted to claim ownership of Cuban assets: the assets of investment in that regime. Cubans understandably feel that they deserve those assets, and this was a major factor in the falling-out between Cuba and the US, and the subsequent economic sanctions against Cuba.

Many Cubans feel that they don't owe the US one cent (if anything, the US owes them reparations).

The sanctions, and the claim on Cuban assets, were a political bungle of monumental proportions by the US. And as long as this madness continues, plenty of Cubans will be anti-American.

I'm sorry, Jack, but I could use some help here. What the hell are you talking about?

[The Andy-Man]

I'm sorry, Jack, but I could use some help here. What the hell are you talking about?

it looks like hes talking about history to me



imo castro will be replaced by another red, prolly a slioghtly more progressive one, but still a red.

[Ned]

Andy, the question I have is what are the alleged "Cuban assets" that the US laid claim to. If he is talking about American-owned businesses and property in Cuba, I think that Jack has a bit of explaining to do as I do not understand the Cuban position.

[Jack the Bodiless]

Yes, American-owned businesses and property in Cuba.

The Batista regime kept the people in poverty, and wealth concentrated in a small number of hands, both Cuban and American. All forms of corruption were rampant. Redistribution of wealth and opportunity was a part of what the revolution was about. Nationalization of assets was inevitable.

The US should have accepted that. Redistribution was necessary. There is a moral here: don't invest in regimes which deny the workers a fair share in the businesses they're working in. Or, if you do: prepare to get burned if they take over.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless
Yes, American-owned businesses and property in Cuba.

The Batista regime kept the people in poverty, and wealth concentrated in a small number of hands, both Cuban and American. All forms of corruption were rampant. Redistribution of wealth and opportunity was a part of what the revolution was about. Nationalization of assets was inevitable.

The US should have accepted that. Redistribution was necessary. There is a moral here: don't invest in regimes which deny the workers a fair share in the businesses they're working in. Or, if you do: prepare to get burned if they take over.

Jack, no one doubts that governments have a right to expropriate property for social or other purposes. However, they owe their prior owners just compensation. This is universally recognized attribute of civilized governments. Expropriation of property without compensation is a violation of international law and can amount to an act of war.

I don't think this issue is going to go away anytime soon. To the extent that US hostility and sanctions have caused Cuba harm far exceeding the value of the property they stole from Americans, all I can say is this is just payment for the barbarity and ideologically driven theft of Fidel Castro.

This said, as soon as that monstrosity is gone and the Cuban people are again allowed democracy and true representative government, I personally would be in favor of using US resources to help Cuba pay reparations to the Americans they stole from.