

US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror - th0br0
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32926821

======
sremani
The existence Cuba on that list was purely political esp. to appease a section
of Florida voters. It is a weird form of identity politics. It goes to show,
that politicians willingness to use laws addressing Terrorism for something
other than Terrorism.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The existence Cuba on that list was purely political esp. to appease a
> section of Florida voters. It is a weird form of identity politics. It goes
> to show, that politicians willingness to use laws addressing Terrorism for
> something other than Terrorism.

Cuba being not removed may have been for that reason, but Cuba being placed on
that reason was not for that reason. While one might argue that the terrorism
involved was no different than what the US and US-allies backed on the other
side of the same global conflict, when Cuba was placed on that list it was
actively backing terrorists around the world as one of the most active
nations, behind the USSR itself, globally promoting the Soviet-led Communist
movement. (If you look at the list in general, the pattern of countries being
added for real reasons, having those reasons largely go away but remaining on
the list until some agreement not directly related to any supposed active
involvement with terrorism between the US and that country is not unique to
Cuba.)

~~~
lx
I don't know what you mean by "backing terrorists"... actually I'm not sure of
your definition of "terrorists", but if you meant members of the Basque
separatist group ETA, you should be aware those ex-militants were sent from
France through Panama to reside in Cuba after an agreement of the Spanish
government (under Felipe González) with Cuba.

disclaimer: I'm Cuban

~~~
dragonwriter
The remaining ETA members in Cuba and their relation to the government were
the one of the last things cited in recent (2010-ish) US terrorism reports on
Cuba, along with incomplete evidence of having completely cut ties with FARC,
but rather more substantial support to international armed revolutionary
groups that the US described as terrorist (including ETA, FARC in Colombia,
various groups opposed to US-friendly central American governments, and
others) was why it was put on the list in 1982.

(I won't argue against the position that the US was doing much the same thing
on the other side of the same geopolitical conflict so that the "terrorist"
label was always somewhat misrepresenting the purpose of the list -- and not
just Cuba's inclusion on it -- or that the initial premise of the inclusion
had long ceased to be relevant. I won't even argue against the position that
some of the groups Cuba backed that justified its inclusion on the list were
no worse -- and perhaps even _less_ terroristic -- all things considered, than
the often US-backed entities they opposed.)

~~~
netcan
When everyone can be on the list, it becomes a lie to single out one party.
It's like in the Soviet republics where 100% of the population was breaking
laws all the time just to live. Police could then just go and arrest anyone
arbitrarily, with 100% confidence they would make something stick.

Same here. There are lots of terrorist supporting states. The ones one the
list are the ones that are US enemies. Cuba's place on the list is
"political^" in that sense. Yes, they sponsored terrorism. Yes, that provides
justification for inclusion according to the rules of the list. But no,
sponsoring terrorism is not why they were included on the list. They were
included for being enemies of the US and its allies.

^I wouldn't even call it political, unless you'd also call an invasion or
declaration of war political in the same circumstances.

------
netcan
Words like terrorism just can't be left in the hand of politicians. It's
incredible how middle eastern dictators have picked it up as a name for their
enemies.

This is all very Orwellian. Terrorism is currently just a euphemism for
"enemy." We should just go back to using that title. It's way more honest. 'US
removes Cuba from list of enemies' is what actually happened.

Can you imagine a military conflict today without at least one side accusing
the other of terrorism?

~~~
x5n1
It used to be a political tool for furthering potentially legitimate political
or ideological interests. These days it has been corrupted to further
illegitimate, religious interests. That's out of bounds. So let's make a rule
to only use it in cases where it applies to illegitimate political and
ideological interests. Otherwise, let's call them potential freedom fighters,
depending on outcome.

~~~
pekk
Calling something terrorism never implied favorably that the interest was
legitimate, so it isn't a corruption to apply it to hated groups like ISIS,
it's just a description. The phrase "freedom fighter" has never been usable in
an objective way.

------
chrisdevereux
Irony is beautiful:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project)

~~~
a_c_s
Trying to overthrow a government is not terrorism.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Trying to overthrow a government is not terrorism.

True; "trying to overthrow a government" is a goal, "terrorism" is a means
deployed to achieve a goal. You can do the former without the latter or the
latter without the former, but the Cuban Project had the goal of overthrowing
a government _and_ used terrorism as a major one of its means.

------
dopeboy
About time. I had an opportunity to visit[0] last summer and it's ridiculous
they're still on their list. Human rights record is more spotty and deserves
scrutiny but they're not actively out to kill Americans.

[0] - [http://dopeboy.github.io/cuba/](http://dopeboy.github.io/cuba/)

------
harrumph
Nobody deserves a point of view on this until they learn about Luis Posada
Carriles living out his life comfortably in Miami after bombing a Cuban
jetliner out of the sky with no survivors.

------
0x0
Does it mean Cubans can now install the Oracle Java runtime?

~~~
meepmorp
Every citizen of every nation of the earth is entitled to having crapware
bundled with their software installers.

------
orthecreedence
Maybe at some point the US will be able to remove itself from that list as
well.

------
smitherfield
My friend whose uncle was murdered by FARC will be happy to know Cuba no
longer supports terrorism.

~~~
markvdb
I'm sorry to hear about your friend's uncle's fate.

But look at the bright side of this announcement! This is not about Cuba
supporting terrorism or not. It's about the US government taking the Cuban
government off its list labeled "governments supporting terrorism". Two
governments are improving their communication.

With some luck, this will help diminish state (sponsored) violence against
innocent people a little bit.

------
x5n1
Every State supports freedom fighters sometimes, depending on political and
ideological interests. But when you need to create a special list as
justification for economic warfare, then that name, "freedom fighter", is
rebranded something less appealing. But both of these use the same means to
further political or ideological goals... and States are not exempt from using
these means either.

