Che and cold blooded cruelty - you'll be mad

[mike the guy]

i'm new to this Che fellow, i know who he is but only recently am i trying to find a deeper understanding of who he was. i camre across this on thsi very site...

"he was also a ruthless disciplinarian who unhesitatingly shot defectors, as later he got a reputation for cold-blooded cruelty in the mass execution of recalcitrant supporters of the defeated president Batista."

now, if this is really what Che was how can you justify respect frot his man?

i consider my self left wing, and hell, even socialist, so PLEASE don't consider this an attack on what you believe. I would just like to be EDUCATED.

[bluerev002]

Che probably got that image when after he had won the revolution and was faced with all these anti-revolutinaires and chivatos (people who snitch) who were still loyal to Batista. So Che put them on trial and the people wanted the followers of their oppressor dead. Che made the firing squads and oredered many people dead.

His famly and friends that were coming to visit him now after the revolution witnessed this and were shocked. they were so used to seein this little boy playing rugbee and always smiling...and now he was killing all of these people? But they soon found out, it was for the good of the revolution.

Che was not ruthless and Cold-Blooded, if youve read Guerrilla Warfare he even says to take in the wounded enemy and take care of them. Che would never abuse the prisoners, if at all he had prisoners (Che opposed to having them).

There you go, Che was not ruthless and Cold-blooded and all he did was to stop counterrevolutionaries. If he hadnt killed them in the firing squads they might have come back with Batista.

[mike the guy]

hey, thanks. ib should read some of that guerilla warfare book.

[bluerev002]

yep yep, its a good book written by Che himself, theres two of them

Guerrilla Warfare
Guerrilla Warfare: A Method

I have this book that has both and "A message to the Tricontinental".

Its short the whole book is 175 pgs long. But its short too so there has to be other copies that have less pages than that.

[mEds]

Che was the man mang!

[Felicia]

Ok think of it this way:

If the deserters were allowed to go free, they'd most likely be captured by the military and tortured for information. This has indeed happened and it may be a reason for the failing of the mission to Bolivia. In one instance, some deserters were captured by the military and the guerrilla base was raided because of the leaked information. Also two other guerrillas were captured while in a bolivian town, I don't know for sure if they were deserters (I don't think that they were) but the military got infortmation out of them.

When you commit yourself to a cause, it's ok to leave when the challenges and risks increase? I don't think so. You'd know too much for them to just let you go, you'd know where their main base is, possibly where weapons and ammo are being stored, and even when they are planning their next march, making it easy for an enemy ambush to be set up in advance of their march. If there were traitors, they'd be shot, if they were deserting during combat, they'd be shot. If they were leaving the guerrilla band without "approval" they'd be shot. Having them free is a great threat to the movement.

But that's not to say that every "deserter" was shot. Periodically in Cuba, with new recruits, Che would give the men the opportunity to leave if their heart wasn't entirely in it for the long haul, and many did leave for their normal lives again. It's just that when you get deeply rooted in a movement you know a lot of details about the guerrillas, their size, where they station themselves, their bush movements. You can't just be "let go" because it doesn't take much for the military to capture and torture you for all of the information you know. Putting the lives of all the revolutionaries in grave danger, one man's cowardess is no reason for the others to die! You either remain faithful to the movement or you're killed. It's simple enough. That takes care of the killings of deserters......

The Cuban guerrilla's didn't participate in terrorist activities or uneccessary killings. Raul once took american and canadian hostages that were working in Cuba, they were fed well and taken care of prior to their release. They could have been easily slaughtered but were not because that wasn't the aim of the movement. If peasants were killed it was because they were feeding information to the military, chivatos were enemy informants and were killed by the guerrilla's if caught. Whereas guijiros (normal peasants, not informants) were greatly helpful to the guerrillas. Without peasant support you have nothing, you're a terrorist yourself. Chivatos deserved to die, they would cause the killings of entire villiages by the information they'd provide to the military on which villages were aiding the guerrillas. In fact, I think that's when Che shot his first man, when a village was being raided by military and they were there to try and defend the people of that village.

does this help you any? :) ;)

[bluerev002]

i HATE Chivatos, they deserved to die more than anyone, well, exept for Batista himself.

Right, see thats what made Che and the whole Cuban revolution so great was the fact that people were taken in, treated by the guerrillas and then released.

They had major help from the Guijiros which is kinda rare for a revolution. You may hear of Guerrilla groups that attack villagers and such, but they are not very wise and are usually the ones that fail or if they do succeed end up being cruel oppressor.

Che was a good Guerrilla :)

[Felicia]

Yes, he was one of the good ones :)