My friend whose uncle was murdered by FARC will be happy to know Cuba no longer supports terrorism.
http://www.cfr.org/cuba/state-sponsors-cuba/p9359#p1 has some context.
US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
11–20 of 41 posts
Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 involve…
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
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.)
Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#13Irony is beautiful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project
Trying to overthrow a government is not terrorism.
Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#14About 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.
Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#15Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#16Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#17Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#18Irony is beautiful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project
Trying to overthrow a government is not terrorism.
> 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.
Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#19Re: US removes Cuba from list of state sponsors of terror
#20Every 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.