Batista and America

[Wiesty]

I wana know somtin, Why did america back batistsa, from what i hear, he was like the stalin of cuba. So why would america allow something like that? Was it that batista was doin things to his own country to meet american standards. Can someone help me with this? I know they dont like fidel causes hes communist but cuba is better off with him anyways

[pandora]

The bigger question is how the racist US could back a leader who wasn't white, the US prefers its neocolonial holdings to be held by facist overly authoritarian leaders who stomp out workers rights in favor of US holdings in turn for a bribe or payoff.

[Red Skyscraper]

Why would America do something like back a dictator Batista?

Comrade,

When you study American history carefully, you'll embark on a quest to discover that the United $tates isn't what it seems. You're gonna find out a lot of sinister facts along the way, going to show that's what in a high school history textbook is far from the truth. :hammer:

[mysticofthewest]

you might think castros bad but he is a saint compared to batistia

[Commie Girl]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 10:06 PM
I wana know somtin, Why did america back batistsa, from what i hear, he was like the stalin of cuba. So why would america allow something like that? Was it that batista was doin things to his own country to meet american standards. Can someone help me with this? I know they dont like fidel causes hes communist but cuba is better off with him anyways
The U$ backed Batista because they prefer to have Dictators suppress the people so they can rape the country with little opposition! This is how it has always been. The U$ have no problem assasinating legitimate, democratically elected leaders (ie: Pinochet) and installing Dictators to comtrol the people. Or, as in the case of the Phillipines, they leave the people with someone like Marcos.

Remember, the U$ backed Hussein, looked the other way, and actually assisted him in the war with Iraq until it no longer served their "interests".

[bunk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 01:38 PM
]
The U$ backed Batista because they prefer to have Dictators suppress the people so they can rape the country with little opposition! This is how it has always been. The U$ have no problem assasinating legitimate, democratically elected leaders (ie: Pinochet) and installing Dictators to comtrol the people. Or, as in the case of the Phillipines, they leave the people with someone like Marcos.

Remember, the U$ backed Hussein, looked the other way, and actually assisted him in the war with Iraq until it no longer served their "interests".
I thought the U.S installed Pinochet?

[Red Guard]

Originally posted by crossfire+Apr 25 2004, 10:13 AM--> (crossfire @ Apr 25 2004, 10:13 AM)
[email protected] 25 2004, 01:38 PM
]
The U$ backed Batista because they prefer to have Dictators suppress the people so they can rape the country with little opposition! This is how it has always been. The U$ have no problem assasinating legitimate, democratically elected leaders (ie: Pinochet) and installing Dictators to comtrol the people. Or, as in the case of the Phillipines, they leave the people with someone like Marcos.

Remember, the U$ backed Hussein, looked the other way, and actually assisted him in the war with Iraq until it no longer served their "interests".
I thought the U.S installed Pinochet? [/b]
Yep, installed Pinochet and killed Allende. To the U$, it doesn't matter what a dictator like Batista does to his people, as long as he serves their interests. Mobutu, Somoza, Suharto, Pinochet, the Douvalier's, all served U$ interests so they got the special treatment. Here, just check this out.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000518.php

[Commie Girl]

Yes, they did install Pinochet after they assasinated Allende. Sorry for the confusion.

[atlanticche]

they supplied america with a shit load of sugar which, america werent producing themselves, they also provided a very good place to put a military base, and also because batista was a shit load better than the person whoever he was i cant remember, to america anyway

[mysticofthewest]

There right the term the whore of america was first coined to talk about batistia's cuba

[atlanticche]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 07:05 PM
There right the term the whore of america was first coined to talk about batistia's cuba
hahahahahahaha

youve got to be kidding me thats great :D

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

Simply put - Cuba was to be America's 'get away' for the usual 9-5ers. Cuba was supposed to be something like a travel spot for most of corporate America. Batista saw the money the US had to offer, thus complied with American intervention. Castro didnt wanna see Cuba turn into another colonial state at the whim of American Imperialism.

Look at Guyana as well, America installed Linden Forbes Sampson Burnham, which tore that country apart.

[Kurai Tsuki]

You really find it surprising that america would help a dictator? :blink: What do you think it's been doing (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=23142&hl=interventionism) for the last fifty years?

[Red Skyscraper]

The last fifty years? Heh, try 200 years!

In fact, you can even trace U$ imperialism back to the American Revolution with the failed invasion of Canada!

Here's a website for those who are interested in what the US has done:

http://americanpeace.eccmei.net/

[Red Guard]

Great link, Red Skyscraper! Some people need to wake up and realize all the Imperialist crimes the U$ has commited worldwide. Filthy assasins.

[atlanticche]

cuba has mever had a dictator, there was Batista and he was told what to do by america so he wasnt a dictator then Castro and hes the same

[Kurai Tsuki]

Of course there is the mother of all books american interventionism, Killing Hope by William Blum.

[mysticofthewest]

no castro is not a pawn of the us but he is a dictator he is not the greatest man on earth by any strech of the imagenation but he is better than batista

[atlanticche]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 07:04 PM
no castro is not a pawn of the us but he is a dictator he is not the greatest man on earth by any strech of the imagenation but he is better than batista
how it doesnt seem to make a difference to the majority of the peasants, they all get arrested for a tiny complaint, and there are huge ques, i dont think you really had that with batista, but then batista didnt actually give them anything, and was greedier than castro

he is a restricted dictator, cause he wont do anything without america backing them anymore