President Fidel Castro of Cuba has accused his US counterpart George Bush of plotting to assassinate him.

Is this story believable, would Bush plot to kill him?

Or Does Castro have another agenda?

My Personal take is that we cannot really say whether his claim is true or not. But one thing is for sure - Castro is trying to be as provocative as possible. He probably wants to inflict some sort of damage on Bush in anyway he can. In this situation it seems like he is trying to agitate Bush and tell him that the invasion of Iraq does not worry him. America has sent a clear signal to the world not to mess with them, and here, Castro is sending out the same signal specfically to America.



He is almost asking for a challenge here, does Castro want to go down in history - given his age - as a martyr? It may seem that way:

It wouldn't surprise me. You have to remember that we've tried to knock him off numerous times throughout the years. The sad thing is--if we opened up trade, he would fall after the first Wal-Mart was constructed. Yet, we continue to follow an asinine policy that has accomplished nothing during the last forty years. It's a shame that common sense policy(i.e.-that trade will bring about Castro's demise) is rejected by people in a large city who continue to believe in some fantasy notion that our refusal to trade with Cuba will *hurt* Castro.

This title is funny. Castro accuses Bush of killing him.

I would say no way. Castro is a nobody. An old geiser who were are just waiting to die of old age. I dont think Bush cares enough to try against someone so worthless.

Castro accused Clinton of trying to kill him along with almost every other President since the 60's. This is just more of the same from this wacko. Absolutly nothing to take seriously.

Hoping not to sound predictable, I think that an assassination could be a possible course of action. Unlike Iraq, Cubas regime is mainly depending on the person of Castro, and Cuba has been a pain in the *** of American politics for many decades.
Instead of invading the small country and risking a deteriorating reputation in world politics the execution of one man without leaving proof seems desirable.
To do this now would give Bush the support of many exile-cubans, who would have some influence in the upcoming elections.

Nevertheless it seems a little too far out, even for a president like Bush Jr. Maybe there are plans to kill Castro but that does not mean that the president would actually do this. Could be that Castro has information about those plans... Castro wants to have attention, or he wants to let Bush look as a loose cannon. Who knows?

Tell that to a Cuban.

I think assasinating someone like Castro would be quite difficult.....he's well protected and paranoid. Its not very easy to go and assasinate leaders of foreign countries, otherwise Saddam would have been killed off long ago and North Korea would be less of a problem. America has amongst the best special forces in the world, but they're not supermen. Anyone sent to kill Castro (imo) would be fairly likely to fail & if captured would be politically embaressing (not to mention likely to up the paranoia quotient for Kim Jong Il etc)

I would disagree with that, for the only thing you need to execute someone is to have the means (Special Forces or Tomahawks) and the position of where the person is located, which should be quite easy given the intelligence gathering of the CIA.
So If you have the means you would only need the will.

Problem you are forgetting is that assassinating a high-profile politician automatically makes him a martyr. That is the problem. Where he falls, thousands will stand up and seek revenge.

What you say might well be true, nebraska29.

I wouldn't put it past this administration or many of the previous ones to encourage Fidel Castro to go on to his eternal reward a little more expeditiously.

Fidel Castro will never be a "nobody" or just an old geezer to the United States as long as there are politically influential ex-patriates and their descendants in Florida continuing to hold a grudge against him.

I truly have a hard time sympathizing with the exiles. Think about it--Fulgencio Batista was no role model for human rights and compassion towards the less fortunate. Those people made oodles of money under him and didn't care about anyone else. When the tables turned, we are supposed to believe that as bad as Castro is, that anyone of them in power is a good turn of events. What will guarantee that they wouldn't imprison political dissidents like Castro? What will guarantee that they will respect human rights and actually try to be somewhat egalitarian in their policies towards the people on the island? I'm sure that when Castro is gone, so will communism die. At the same time, we will be supporting a government that will relegate Cuba to be an autocratic government, the admiration of all banana republics everywhere.

Having vacationed in Cuba numerous times, and spent a time exploring the countryside and culture, allow me to voice my opinion:

Firstly, Doran I must completely disagree, Castro has been exceptionally quiet and even co-operative since 9/11. he has made himself more seen on the international scene, he has co-operated fully with US authorities with regards to detainees at Guantanimo, and has made several agreements with US authorities regarding what happens if they escape to Cuban soil (they will be returned) he has toned down his fanaticism and rhetoric in public speeches, and spoken out numerous times against both the 9/11 bombings in particular, and world terrorism in general.

Cuba is not the desolate third world nation many US peiople make it out to be. The rest of the world, in particular Canada, China and Europe, trade freely with Cuba, and while the still compare disfavourably with a first world country, they are certainly far more prosperous than any third world country. Their social systems work very well, with very high standards of education and exceptional standards of medicine. People in central and south America, when they get sick they do not flee o the US, they flee to Cuba.

Now of course there are still many problems. Antiquated infrastructire is being replaced and modernised, though very slowly, it is still a technical police state to High Crimes tend to be dealt with severely, and the economy is very inefficient, as it still works on a Communist model, and lacking incentives there is no reason for the common man to excel (The crippling doom of any Communist state). The flip side of that is that everyone has a home, power water and appliances, not to mention free education and medicine, everybody. If Cuba can afford to take care of its people, I wonder why the US and other first world nations cannot?

Interestingly, in private polls taken of the Cuban people in various cities (Private but monitored, so not controlled by the government, and thus fairly reliable) have indicated most Cubans have little desire for Trade with the US even itf it became open, precicely because they do not want to be swamped with WallMarts and MacDonalds.

Why castro would now claim assassination attempts is beyond me, it does not serve his political purposes... who knows, perhaps Bush decided God told him to kill Castro...

This kind of rhetoric is pure nonsense.

Link to article of Castro's claim:

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040130-093733-9773r.htm

IMO, while I think we have to keep our eyes and ears open regarding Castro, there are much bigger fish to fry than him. He is 77 years old...odd how many of these bad guys live on and on like Ever Ready batteries...and like many dictators can't tell friend from foe and only get more paranoid as they age. They are so evil that they envision others thinking like they do and capable of doing to them what they have done to others. If Castro and the others had a conscience, I would think he and his ilk were suffering from a guilt complex, but no such luck.

Sounds also like an echo of our North Korea leader.

I really think you're over estimating special forces & intelligence here. Most dictators have a cadre of bodyguards equal to the best special ops that anyone in the west has (reason being we generally train them). Even the best Delta Force / SAS / SBS / Navy Seal / whatever group will only be able to get so far against a large & well trained elite unit that dictators generally have somewhere, even if the majority of the army is poorly armed and trained.

Tomahawks, agreed are accurate and deadly, but you need to know the location of your target and then pick a time when he isn't hiding in an armoured, underground bunker (and be prepared to admit publically that you did it). The inital plan of the Iraq war was to take out Saddam and his aides, through missile bombardment, but, because noone knew where he was (although the CIA thought he was in Bagdad) they didn't catch him for months. Tracking people with satellites isn't easy at all & spies are only useful until they get caught (which, with a paranoid dictator happens a lot).

Given what we've seen in Iraq, I doubt the assasination of Saddam would have led to 1000s seeking revenge.

The only effective way to depose a dictator is to invade. Assasination is a complex process that can go wrong in a lot of ways.

Not plausible. Any possilble political benefit wouldn't be worth the political risks during an election year. And what's the hurry? Cuba is being quiet and not troublesome, and Castro is old. He's a windbag who makes these kinds of accusations so often as to have no credibility at all.

It is my opinion that Castro is simply trying to get some public Discourse about Cuba going... After all, it wasn't so long ago that there was a great opening up of Cuba toward the US, capitalized on by Jimmy Carter

Cuba began buying agricultural products from US farmers and Carter went there to try to open up trade doors, ostensibly as a way to free the nation economically and socially in a non-violent way.

And of course the pres. bush would have nothing to do with it...

Since mr. bush is presently asking countries around the world to do JUST THAT with Iraq (open trade and forgive debt) it seems ironic that he doesn't understand that to be an option in Cuba also.


Perhaps he is still afraid of communists?!?! Hmm..he seems to have no trouble with the "dirty commies" in China. I suspect there is an ulterior motive behind the present administration's policy toward Cuba. It is contradictory to the policies they are espousing for other nations with similar status (Libya comes to mind). I sure hope that the administration isn't ignoring the welfare of Cubans (and American farmers) in order to ensure they win Florida in 2004....

either way, Castro is up to his old tricks again....he has made a career at provoking American presidents and trying to create waves in American politics from a distance. I personally welcome this intrusion because I would like to hear bush's explanation for why economic restructuring will help countries in the Middle East but not one a scant 90 miles from our border....

EDIT: because not even spellcheck can cure my typing woes