view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
If the US went in with the big stick, Cuba would fall in a week. Russia doesn’t have the heft to support Cuba at this time and a China doesn’t have the tradition and reach. Most Cubans have deep connections with the US and they know the different in quality of life. There’s be very little support from the population towards the regime. Cuba has barely any friends internationally.
That doesn’t make it right. But of all the countries to “take”, Cuba would be the simplest for the US. And Trump might just be mad enough to do it.
When was the last time you visited cuba / talked to their people directly?
I went around 2018ish, and your take doesn't track. You're right, Russia doesn't have the heft to support Cuba -- but they haven't had the heft to support Cuba for decades. Most Cubans in their 40s that I met, looked back at the days of a stronger Russia as an ideal time period, where they had more goods available -- they literally long for the good old days when Communism was bigger on the world stage. They clearly associate/blame the USA's actions for causing unnecessary famines and issues. Why on earth would you think people would be favorable to a foreign nation that is literally enacting economic warfare to starve the population?? "Thank you for the boot, may I have another?" What??
One of Cuba's main 'exports', are doctors/medical staff for disasters facing other countries. Becoming a doctor in Cuba is basically free of charge, but you gotta work for the govt for a few years after you graduate -- as a low paid, outsourced worker as part of these relief teams. Cuba's govt charges western-ish rates for assistance, but pays those docs a lot less, pocketing the margin for funding govt activities / programs, such as their medical programs. Practically any country that has had a major natural disaster, has gotten assistance from Cuba in this way, because of how they've structured the program -- so I reckon most of those countries would be friendly to Cuba. "Big" western nations aren't the only 'friends' Cuba can have. Heck, there've been articles from numerous news sources even just recently, noting that increased American aggression on this front is impacting health services in various other countries.
America has a lopsided, bully-oriented, military approach at present. They spend an absolutely absurd amount on their military -- hell, they could probably blow up most of the UKs government if they wanted to, which is why your politicians are being such pussies when it comes to the US going rogue and openly boasting about committing war crimes. They have the operational capacity to attack/destroy most other governments. It's not clear they have the capability to occupy and control additional land / regions though, as evidenced by their fumblings in the middle east in recent past, and in that they didn't stick around in Venezuela (they didn't even topple that regime, just abducted the dictator at the top). Having soft power / the support of the people, is an essential component to that sort of thing -- and seeing as America's recent actions are pissing off / alienating even Western powers, I see no reason why anyone would think they'd have much 'success' in occupying foreign lands. They'd meet active resistance, just like their attempts to setup in Iraq/Afghanistan -- likely to a much larger degree even.
You are vastly underestimating cuban peoples commitment to the revolution (they on avg have better QOL than an avg american). Calling it regime you are manufacturing consent for invasion but again you are western british chauvinist so this is expected.
The US has been in with the big stick for 50+ years against Cuba and they've resisted not just fine but with a higher life expectancy than the US. They just haven't invaded militarily so far because they expect greater internal and international support for the Cuban government as a result, so their strategy is to enforce hunger through sanctions. From the US office of the historian:
"Salient considerations respecting the life of the present Government of Cuba are:
The majority of Cubans support Castro (the lowest estimate I have seen is 50 percent).
There is no effective political opposition.
Fidel Castro and other members of the Cuban Government espouse or condone communist influence.
Communist influence is pervading the Government and the body politic at an amazingly fast rate.
Militant opposition to Castro from without Cuba would only serve his and the communist cause.
The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.
If the above are accepted or cannot be successfully countered, it follows that every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba. If such a policy is adopted, it should be the result of a positive decision which would call forth a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government."
And most Cubans are aware that the reason is the economic embargo, and that at least they can afford rent and healthcare unlike yanks.
You're absolutely making that up.
Cubans are better educated than Americans. They know why they kicked the American mobs out of Cuba.
I honestly don't know why they went Iran instead of Cuba if they wanted to wave their big dick around.
I've seen reports that Trump was going to go for Greenland and his advisors shifted his attention to Iran instead. There was also that time Trump leaked Macron's message where Macron said he'd support Trump with Iran if he backed off Greenland.
Completely agree. Iran of all places - I genuinely think he believed he could somehow force a better deal than Obama. Talk about not understanding the regime.