Why does the US have a base in Cuba? Doesn't the US have a bad relationship with Cuba?
463951
The answers already given try to answer why the US wants a base in Cuba, but it doesn't explain why we have one.  The US would probably also love to have bases in North Korea, but that isn't happening any time soon, while we do have one in Cuba.  Why?\n\nBecause we used to have a different relationship with the country. It all started during the Spanish-American war (in 1898), when the US landed in Cuba, which was then a Spanish colony.  The whole thing started when Cubans started rebelling against Spanish rule, and the Spanish responded by setting up prison camps, officially to separate rebels from everyone else, but which really meant setting up a violent police state and rounding up all the rural Cubans they could and treating them very badly so that many hundreds of thousands died of disease and starvation.  The Spanish also burned homes, farms and equipment to make it hard to offer the rebels any material support.\n\nAt the same time, two New York newspapers were engaged in fierce competition for readers, and one of them (William Randolph Heart, the inventor of yellow journalism, which is sensational and melodramatic writing) started describing the horrors of Cuba in very graphic and melodramatic terms.  The result was that people bought his newspapers, and they started pushing the US to intervene and help the Cuban rebels.  Around the same time, the US ship the USS Maine was docked in the Havana harbor when it blew up.  At the time, Americans believed that it was done on purpose by the Spanish to prevent the Maine from offering any help or even "sending a message" on behalf of the Cuban rebels.  The Spanish maintained that it was a boiler accident that blew up the Maine, and analysis of the wreckage has since shown they were right, but the US public was already so angry at the Spanish for their treatment of the Cubans that they didn't believe them.  \n\nThis was the final straw for the US, plus a justification for intervening on behalf of the Cuban rebels.  They invaded Cuba (and several other Spanish colonies), drove out the Spanish and the Cuban rebels took control of their government. \nThe US had already set up a base in Guantanamo Bay during this war, and now that the Cuban leadership was so beholden to the US, the US asked for a favor back.  In February 1903 the US and Cuba's first president signed a lease for Guantanamo bay allowing the US to use it in perpetuity.  \n\nThis was to the Cubans' advantage because they didn't want the Spanish coming back and they did want good relations with the US and it was to the US's advantage because they got a base in the Caribbean.  Officially, Guantanamo Bay belongs to Cuba, but the US can rent it as long as it wants.  it even now pays rent to the Cuban government for the area.\n\nSince that time there was a revolution in Cuba, the Communist revolution, which brought Fidel Castro into power.  The US does not like Fidel Castro and he does not like the US, but the US is too powerful to kick out of Guantanamo using military means, and the US insists on staying, so both sides pretend that the Platt Agreement (the agreement that included the lease of Guantanamo Bay) is fine by them.  \n\nThe US is now using Guantanamo Bay to hold prisoners because it is still technically Cuba, not the US, and it argues that  US laws and US jurisdiction do not apply there.  This is partly true, they don't, as it is Cuba, but it is also the US military, which means that the laws that apply to the US military wherever they are DO apply there.  This is the basis of the arguments currently going through the US courts on behalf of some of the prisoners demanding fairer trials and hearings.
169098
partly, yes. Cuba, as you know is a commie country who hates America (or at least Fidel Castro does). I think bush is too paranoid...
119195
The US had not entered the war with the intention of gaining a colonial empire. However, at the end of the war the colonial ruler Spain was militarily crushed and the three remaining colonies (Cuba, Puerto Rico and Philippines) were in rebellion. The US felt if they did not take posession that they would be seized by European powers (a German flotilla did show up off of Manila Bay).
1114752
Oil can be both a blessing & a curse! Especially when the USA invades your country to steal it. What could the Army steal from Cuba? A few cigars.\n\nAmerica tried to invade Cuba in the 60s as described below but it was a failure.
931804
lol.   we just attack anybody that doesnt follow our ways huh?  You dont agree with us you die?  We allowed Cuba to stay communist in OUR hemisphere.  This is one of the worst questions I have ever read.
309240
The trade embargo with Cuba is not successful because there are plenty of other countries that wish to trade with them. It was only the United States that had a problem with Cuba's regime change and subsequent romance with Communism. The Russians have had a healthy trade with Cuba since the early 1960s.\n\nBasically, trade embargos can only work if they are universally adhered to. This one is not. In fact, some countries around the world believe that the trade embargo with Cuba is unjust (possibly illegal) and only serves to hurt the common people of the country.
617685
No, because while the US did maintain missile forces in Europe, they were not placed there secretly. The Organization of American States had declared Cuba after the Castro revolution to no longer be a legitimate member of the hemisphere.\n\nThe Soviet Union, while yes they were trying to even the playing field in a manner of speaking, was still acting secretively, dishonestly, and dangerously.
1034629
The Cuban government does NOT bar Americans from visiting Cuba.  In fact, Cuba makes special concessions to American visitors such as not stamping visas in their passports -- which could cause them to be arrested upon return to US soil.\n\nThe US government doesn't acually prohibit American citizens from travelling to Cuba, but it is illegal for Americans to spend money or receive gifts (such as meals or lodging) in Cuba without a license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control.  \n\nJFK imposed travel restrictions on Feb 8, 1963 in response to the Cuban Missile Crisis.  The restrictions lapsed in 1979 when Jimmy Carter did not renew them.  The current restrictions are codified in the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 515.
98440
Guantanamo Bay was a U.S. Base when it was a U.S. territory. WHen Castro took over, he allowed the U.S. to lease it for 30 dollars a month. But as of today Castro does not take the payment.
543501
The US has this tradition of embracing with love it's former enemies.  And this goes way back in our history.\n\nDuring our first 100 years, our hated enemy was England.  But during WW I, we formed a bond that stands today.  In WWII, Japan was the hated enemy that attacked us without warning.  Now, we are tight allies.  I was stationed for over a year in Japan, and I know the common Japanese citizen appreciates the US militart doing a large share of their protection.\n\nThe same holds with Germany, Italy, even Russia and China.  This country has a tradition of taking a former enemy and trying to be their friend.\n\nFor a good example, look at Lybia.  Once considered a threat, relations have stabilized.  There are even free trade talks being conducted, in an effort to improve their economy.\n\nThe only thing that prevents this from happening more often is how the other nation acts towards the US.  In North Korea, they still teach children the US is the enemy and must be destroyed.  Iran and Cuba also act antagonistic towards us.  I bet if they stopped the beligerance and acted friendly, they would be shocked at how much aid and money the US Government would freely give them.\n\nOverall, the US really only wants 2 things.  Friendship, and free trade.  If you act antagonistic towards us, we will be antagonistic back.  And if you restrict our trade, we will restrict yours to us.  Historically, that has been proven many times.\n\nAnd remember, Saddam was combined with Lybia 20 years ago.  Now Saddam is in jail, and Kadaffi is still in power, with improving relations with the US.  And Kaddafi even tried to get Saddam to pull out of Kuwait in '90.  WHich was the smart dictator, and which was the stupid dictator?
315216
We tried to kill Castro in the Bay of Pigs fiasco under the Kennedy administration. At that point in history, he was a threat to the US because Cuba was communist and only lies 90 miles from our door step.  Kennedy's plan in the Bay of Pigs was to land Cuban refugees to kill Castro, but the plan failed miserably because as soon as the refugees land in Cuba, the local Cubans came running up and massacered them.  Thus, part of the answer to your question is that we haven't killed him because his people won't let us kill him.  Also, now we don't really see the need to kill him because he is no longer a threat.  The Soviet Union collapsed so Cuba doesn't have anyone to back it up against the US.  The embargos the US placed on Cuba have held him in check too because Cuba has remained one of the poorest nations in the world due to the fact that it can't trade with the US.  If you go to Cuba, you only see cars from the 1970s and things like band aids are rationed.  The US still maintains a watchful eye on Castro, aka Guantanamo Bay, but the need to take him out has subsided.
1072582
Cuba is a communist nation. the people get treated right some Cubans want to overthrow the president Fidel Castro because he has been in power for over 43years. They cant have free elections and they are not allowed to talk bad about their president.
963235
Cuba was very much a  playground for wealthy foreigners and run by the mafia. Castro kicked them out and gave Cuba an excellent health and education programme. For many Cubans he has been a huge success. He has been very badly treated by America who have tried to destroy the country by trade embargoes. This has failed -and should have stopped long ago.
313669
Maybe some of the previous answerers are too young, but they're wrong in so many ways.\nAt the time of that quote, for example, many Latin American countries were indeed ruled by dictators backed by the U.S. You may say that it was because of the Cold War and the need to keep communists out of power, but there is no denying who put them there, or kept them there. The U.S. backed, or installed, dictators in, among other places, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama, Cuba and Chile. (And that's a partial list in Latin America.)\n\nWhy? Well, to use the words to FDR when installing the Somoza clan in power "Somoza may be a son of a b**ch, but he's our son of a b**ch."\n\nDon't kid yourselves. many of us went to war defending various brutal dictatorships who were "anti-communist." It's all in the public record. So you may say we were "right" in doing it, but you can't deny we did it. MLK knew his history.
197935
Puerto Rico is part of the United States. Cuba is a dictatorship under Castrol The Dominican Republic is a very unstable country in the area.
625004
Cuba as they do not comply to US laws :)\n\nSwitzerland as they do not reveal sources.\n\nBahamas Islands as they have created all this for what you are asking for.
675480
Ha, ha, I'd pay to see an American president admit America was wrong over Cuba. The US will continue to be a baby and never admit they were wrong...how un-American!