WI: Cuba Invaded and Occupied in the 1960's?

[Emperor Norton I]

What if Cuba, without nuclear confrontation, had been invaded by the United States and occupied in the 1960s?

[Blackadder mk 2]

Guerilla warfare for god knows how long.

[Gosing]

Tricky.

Assuming there is a Castro takeover something like in OTL, the US has a relatively short window of oppurtunity between the Cubans starting to lean towards the Soviets and when an invasion would spark WWIII. I can imagine a limited engagement slowly building up into a basic occupation, but conquest without a figleaf of a puppet state I find unlikely.

[Corbell Mark IV]

Originally Posted by Gosing

Tricky.

Assuming there is a Castro takeover something like in OTL, the US has a relatively short window of oppurtunity between the Cubans starting to lean towards the Soviets and when an invasion would spark WWIII. I can imagine a limited engagement slowly building up into a basic occupation, but conquest without a figleaf of a puppet state I find unlikely.

THe Soviets aren't going to start WWIII over Cuba, especially not in the 60s.

As said Guerilla fighting for several years, after a serious campaign. Cuba isn't a flyspeck like Grenada!

Earlier would be better than later. Later more Latin American countries for the Sovs to use this for propaganda purposes.

Wonder if the Mob would try to get Havana casinos back up?

Lots of butterflies.

Smaller guerilla war prior to Vietnam might give some usefull lessons a lot cheaper, but probably not.

Elections in a couple of years. Followed by a friendly goverment.

Long term more US Cuban trade. Bigger Cuban economy, no cuban troops in Africa, less Cuban gun running in Latin America.

Less Cuban community in Florida.

[yourworstnightmare]

Originally Posted by Corbell Mark IV

THe Soviets aren't going to start WWIII over Cuba, especially not in the 60s.

As said Guerilla fighting for several years, after a serious campaign. Cuba isn't a flyspeck like Grenada!

Earlier would be better than later. Later more Latin American countries for the Sovs to use this for propaganda purposes.

Wonder if the Mob would try to get Havana casinos back up?

Lots of butterflies.

Smaller guerilla war prior to Vietnam might give some usefull lessons a lot cheaper, but probably not.

Elections in a couple of years. Followed by a friendly goverment.

Long term more US Cuban trade. Bigger Cuban economy, no cuban troops in Africa, less Cuban gun running in Latin America.

Less Cuban community in Florida.

And endless corruption (unless the US really bother to avoid it).

Worst case scenario: everything goes back to Happy Mafialand.

[loughery111]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

And endless corruption (unless the US really bother to avoid it).

Worst case scenario: everything goes back to Happy Mafialand.

Which is, at heart, still probably better than IOTL. Sure, they're criminals; but they at least create meaningful economic activity in the midst of the murders and theft. So they've got one of the three right vs. none for the Communist government.

[yourworstnightmare]

Originally Posted by loughery111

Which is, at heart, still probably better than IOTL. Sure, they're criminals; but they at least create meaningful economic activity in the midst of the murders and theft. So they've got one of the three right vs. none for the Communist government.

Yes, the Castro brothers are jackasses, and the Communist government is disastrous, but to be honest, it replaced another disastrous government that didn't even pretend to care about the people. Usually when a bad government fall it's replaced by another bad government, and that's how I think Cuba would end up after a US occupation. Sure there'd probably be some kind of (heavily rigged) election, but soon there'd be another crazy dictator, backed by the US, and in worst case scenario a goon of the mafia.

[TNF]

I would assume that the United States is too distracted in Cuba to do anything about Vietnam, which is probably a good thing for everyone involved. I would imagine low intensity guerrilla warfare for most of the decade until the United States gets ready to leave the island (in name, at least) in the early seventies, with a caretaker government in place that's similar to the one we have in Iraq today.

Beyond that, with U.S. forces leaving the island for the most part, a shaky democracy probably won't last all that long without U.S. aid and American troops propping it up. Cuba is probably quite authoritarian for quite sometime, largely aimed at wiping out leftist rebels in the interim while they pursue an agenda of economic renewal like Taiwan or South Korea. The island prospers, but as a result, the labor movement and students get rowdy, and demand change in the late eighties or so, and the country complies, adopting a number of social reforms.

Fastforward to 2010, the Cuban economy is one of the strongest in Latin America, and it's people are relatively well off. Fidel Castro was released from prison not too long ago, despite U.S. outcry and outcry on the island itself that he not be released from prison, though his weak condition ultimately lead to the decision to let him go. The Cuban government is currently trying to enter into a free trade agreement with the United States, though the administration of Democratic President Dick Gephardt is showing some bit of caution to the whole idea.

[RogueBeaver]

You know the picture Nort.

Cuban Provisional Council meets with Defense Secretary Robert Kennedy at the Pentagon, April 21, 1966.

San Roman is furthest at left.



So here you have things as TNF mentioned, but with RFK making Cuba a top priority of his secretaryship. Even more leverage for the presidency in '68: "I won the Cuban peace!"

[Corbell Mark IV]

Originally Posted by The New Freedom

I would assume that the United States is too distracted in Cuba to do anything about Vietnam, which is probably a good thing for everyone involved. I would imagine low intensity guerrilla warfare for most of the decade until the United States gets ready to leave the island (in name, at least) in the early seventies, with a caretaker government in place that's similar to the one we have in Iraq today.

Beyond that, with U.S. forces leaving the island for the most part, a shaky democracy probably won't last all that long without U.S. aid and American troops propping it up. Cuba is probably quite authoritarian for quite sometime, largely aimed at wiping out leftist rebels in the interim while they pursue an agenda of economic renewal like Taiwan or South Korea. The island prospers, but as a result, the labor movement and students get rowdy, and demand change in the late eighties or so, and the country complies, adopting a number of social reforms.

Fastforward to 2010, the Cuban economy is one of the strongest in Latin America, and it's people are relatively well off. Fidel Castro was released from prison not too long ago, despite U.S. outcry and outcry on the island itself that he not be released from prison, though his weak condition ultimately lead to the decision to let him go. The Cuban government is currently trying to enter into a free trade agreement with the United States, though the administration of Democratic President Dick Gephardt is showing some bit of caution to the whole idea.

Not sure that the figthing would last long enough to divert significant forces or attention from Vietnam, might be a postive learning experiance at best. THe communist regime was new and still killing people, which would take the bloom off for some of those who hoped to be left alone.

Agree with the authoritarian democracy with economic growth. And with eventual liberalization. Could go either Bahama route or Venezula route.

Would think the potential US/Cuba trade could be quite high. Cuba is huge, relative to other Caribean states, and could dominate tourism in the Caribbean. And if they managed to steal Las Vegas's thunder the gambiling revenues could also be quite good.

With high volumes of tourist back and forth with the US (possiblity with reduced passport requirerments) the 70s could see a huge problem with cocain smuggling.

[Fenwick]

The thing about a guerilla war seems likely but I do not believe it would be at a level of any serious harm.

First you must look into the level of urbanization ,and over all infastructure with in Cuba. While not one a level of the United States. It would allow troops easier movement through the region. On top of this you have an island. Smuggling will occur but its harder then moving goods over a large shared border. The force Castro used to take power was small and lightly armed so its likely this will be copied. The revolution in Cuba was fought in the hundreds so large scale rebel forces seem unlikely due to the need for supplies.

Second an invaded Cuba will see hundreds of thousands of people arrive. All those who fled Castro would be encouraged to return. Also as the revolution occured in 1959 and the best time for invasion is pre-1961 not enough time has passed for the Cuban refugees to make American roots. So with these middle and upper class people returning any US occupation will have a large group of supporters.

Third the influx of aid will certainly win people over. Yes there is a great shot the mafia could move in and take over but the US government, at least at first, would try hard for a proper democracy. I say this because while the US had no problems proping up tin pot dictators, Cuba is a place where such a dictator failed. So in the short term at least pushing for democracy would be prefered. The Bay of Pigs is a good example as Jose Roman was chosen due to his military history in Cuba, combined with his public disagreement with the military being used against civilians. While the Bay of Pigs history seems to never quite answer what was to occur after the invasion worked I see in the short term at least some publicpush for a moderate in power.

Fourth we should recognize that not all Cubans liked Castro. A group fought against Castro in the mountains for six whole years in the War against the Bandits. The fact that US aid stopped reaching these fellows in 1961 and they fought till 1965 shows two things: without support an insurgency cannot go on, and that some people really hated the communist government.

Originally Posted by Corbell Mark IV

Would think the potential US/Cuba trade could be quite high. Cuba is huge, relative to other Caribean states, and could dominate tourism in the Caribbean. And if they managed to steal Las Vegas's thunder the gambiling revenues could also be quite good.

Prior to the revolution the US sold Cuba 2/3's of its goods. Toss in owning 40% of the farms, and almost 60% of the business and its safe to say America would continue selling much of Cuba's goods. The distances involved allow almost ensure US goods are cheaper, and easier to gain then any other. As to the mafia I am not sure. Vegas was already making money since 1954, and while Cuba made cash it was alongside drugs, hookers, and a lot more. Really Vegas would be more like a west coast event, people want vice, and its located to supply it.

[chris N]

One must point out that an insurgency on Cuba would not last all that long with the US total command of the seas around the Island. The would soon find themselves with no safe haven and gradually be forced into a tigher noose as they were forced into a smaller and smaller area.

If the Communist were crushed in Cuba there is a lot of doubt that Russia or China would be willing to risk a confrontation with the US over Vietnam.

[Fenwick]

Originally Posted by chris N

One must point out that an insurgency on Cuba would not last all that long with the US total command of the seas around the Island. The would soon find themselves with no safe haven and gradually be forced into a tigher noose as they were forced into a smaller and smaller area.

If the Communist were crushed in Cuba there is a lot of doubt that Russia or China would be willing to risk a confrontation with the US over Vietnam.

Yet when you say "crushed" how long is that? Crushing a guerilla war to me is a week, or a month, or even a year. Yet the history of Cuba shows both with the communist, and anti-communist forces groups can hold out for almost a decade without a lot of outside support. The longer it takes to fight the insurgents the worse I see a Cuban government being.

[abc123]

Originally Posted by Emperor Norton I

What if Cuba, without nuclear confrontation, had been invaded by the United States and occupied in the 1960s?

An excellent thing for the Cubans.
Today, Cuba would be the most developed of Latin American nations.

[yourworstnightmare]

Originally Posted by abc123

An excellent thing for the Cubans.
Today, Cuba would be the most developed of Latin American nations.

The only way it would have ended that way is if Cuba became the 51st State.

[abc123]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

The only way it would have ended that way is if Cuba became the 51st State.

Why?

In 1959. they were the most developed Latin American nation allready.

[Sachyriel]

Canada would have contributed troops, better it look aggressive on the World Stage rather than look weak in front of the USA.

[NothingNow]

Originally Posted by mmmeee0

Canada would have contributed troops, better it look aggressive on the World Stage rather than look weak in front of the USA.

And said troops would probalby have standing orders to "secure" Isla de la Juventud.

[archaeogeek]

Originally Posted by abc123

Why?

In 1959. they were the most developed Latin American nation allready.

That wouldn't have lasted, there were laws against mechanization.

[arrowiv]

Of course, there would be no way for the US to restore Batista back to power as he had no credibility with the DC and Miami power-brokers. Comments?