Bay of Pigs

Friday, April 22, 2011

Jim Rasenberger, the author of The Brilliant Disaster: JFK, Castro, and America's Doomed Invasion of Cuba's Bay of Pigs, talks about his new book, which breaks down the various political forces and personality clashes at the heart of the invasion.


Jim Rasenberger

Comments [8]

Curtis from Brooklyn

It's unfortunate that US propraganda concerning Cuba still persists today. Castro's request for aid from the UN and the IMF/World Bank in September 1960 but without the crippling policies attached and was denied. It wasn't until mid December Cuba accepted aid from the Soviet Union with no conditions attached. American corporations (especially United Fruit) were, by far, the biggest economic players in Cuba at the time, owning over 80% of farmland, utilities and banking while the majority of Cuban people were in poverty. Castro's overthrow of Battista amd US colonialism enraged the US and Cuban elite and led to their subsequent attempts at regime change by any means, including the Bay of Pigs, a crippling economic embargo and over 100 attempts on Castro's life, all because the Cuban people refuse to be an US colony.

Apr. 22 2011 12:40 PM
PJ from Brooklyn

To the person who said that he doesn't like the idea of the United States being the "world's policeman, but if not us, who?"
I say, why assume that the world needs a "world policeman?" Who polices the United States? Your idea reflects an arrogance of power. What gives the United States the right to invade a country and overthrow its government? How would we feel if another power tried to overthrow our government?

Apr. 22 2011 11:53 AM

I am appalled at the cavalier attitude of the callers and the guest host's appreciation of mercenary actions in the name of our being the "worlds' cop." Imperialism with a velvet glove? There is no such thing. A police state with ruthless ambition for subverting the "open market" is more apt.

As for Cuba being "stuck in the past" please refer to the crumbling infrastructure here and the never-ending embargo (an act of war) designed by our "leadership" cadre.

In my world a war is between two armies and declared by the Congress. Show me the more war hungry regime, the US or Cuba? (or North Korea after the never-ending "armistice" that the US has no intention of negotiating in good faith).

Remember, you are not paranoid if you have a reason to distrust an unreliable aggressor.

Apr. 22 2011 11:42 AM
jgarbuz from Queens

I remember the early Cuban refugees, who left behind everything in Cuba. We had a Cuban Jewish couple that we gave a job to in our little store. They had left behind a CHAIN of movie houses there, and now they were sweeping and working retail in our humble Brooklyn bargain basement store.
They had a son who was vowing to go back and fight Castro. They had initially supported Castro against Batista, until he proved he was really a communist.

Apr. 22 2011 11:34 AM
Ken from Brooklyn

And fear is the main tactic used to market Right-wing ideology.

Unfortunately, it is very effective in marketing strategies.

Apr. 22 2011 11:26 AM
Hugh Sansom

There's no reason to believe that Kennedy was particularly intelligent. He was (perhaps) well-educated -- certainly expensively so. He was driven and affable.

The "Best and the Brightest" today sound more like "The Smartest Guys in the Room".

By any reasonable definition -- and all available legal ones -- McNamara is a war criminal.

Why this author's fawning, servile adoration of Kennedy?

Apr. 22 2011 11:15 AM
a g from n j

i would ask,how much does geo-political manipulation,have to do with the u.s. assuming a need,and granting itself license, to intervene in cuba, libya, or anywhere else ? to the question by m c from manhattan,"will the results be any different" ? i ask, different from what ? each other ? are, libya and cuba,as seperarte countries,with different historical situations,manifesting at different times,a half century apart,so readily and easily comparable,in the casual assumptions of people that don't have the lives of their loved ones involved. what, is the motivation behind an intervention,that is the real question. let us not "break the pot",and then shamelssly retrofit a motive,in an attempt to ascribe a justification for intervention in an other country,in order to make us feel high and mighty about ourselves,when most of time,these incursions serve no holy purpose,in the greater scheme of things.

Apr. 22 2011 09:59 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

Please ask.....doesn't this half-hearted, indifferent attempt by Obama at regime change in Libya seem very much like the Bay of Pigs fiasco?

Why will the results be any different?

Apr. 22 2011 09:03 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.