Fact check: Post Title: UN votes on the necessity of ending the US embargo against Cuba since 1992 Comment Chain: 1. I gasped when the US itself abstained 2. Obama was actively normalizing relations in 2015-2016. The embargo probably would have ended if Trump hadn't been elected. 3. The normalization under Obama hinged on Cuba having democratic elections. Instead of real democratic elections, Raul Castro chose his friend as the only candidate for the elections, and Cuba just got a different dictator. 4. Why is this particular dictatorship a problem for the US, they have good relationship with most of the others. Something like 70% of countries don't have democratic elections. 5. Cuba is funded by Russia and now China as a strategic location against the US. Notice how the Cuban dictatorship is struggling to keep the country running all of a sudden. That is not because of the embargo that has been going for what 60 years. It's because Russia and Venezuela don't have the money to keep Cuba afloat. Ending the embargo and propping up the puppet government that is there literally to oppose the US would be completely idiotic. Original Reddit link: https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1hz9uj4/comment/m6qewt9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

1. Summary of the results

The comment chain discusses several interconnected aspects of US-Cuba relations, with some claims being verifiable through the provided sources:

• The embargo against Cuba has indeed been a long-standing policy, established in 1962 by President Kennedy ^[1]
• There was a significant attempt at normalization under Obama in 2014-2016, which was subsequently reversed by Trump in 2017 ^[1]
• The claim about Cuba's strategic importance to Russia and China is supported by evidence of Chinese intelligence facilities at specific locations (Bejucal, El Salao, Wajay, and Calabazar) ^[2]
• Cuba has been actively building alliances with both Russia and Iran to counter US sanctions ^[3]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several crucial pieces of context are missing from the discussion:

• The embargo's economic impact has been severe, with Cuba estimating losses at $144 billion, primarily affecting private citizens and entrepreneurs rather than the government ^[1]
• The current Russia-Cuba relationship is more pragmatic and limited compared to Cold War era ties, though it still serves as strategic leverage against the US ^[4]
• Cuba's role as a geopolitical pivot point has historical precedent, serving as a platform for various powers to challenge US interests in the region ^[4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The comment chain contains several potentially misleading or oversimplified assertions:

• The suggestion that Cuba's current economic struggles are solely due to lack of Russian/Venezuelan support overlooks the documented impact of the embargo ^[1]
• The characterization of Cuba as simply a "puppet government" understates the complexity of its international relationships - while it does host Chinese intelligence facilities ^[2] and maintains ties with Russia and Iran ^[3], these relationships appear to be strategic alliances rather than pure puppet-master relationships
• The discussion of democratic elections lacks context about the broader economic and social impacts of the embargo on Cuban citizens ^[1]

Who benefits:

• US defense and intelligence communities benefit from maintaining the narrative of Cuba as a threat due to its hosting of foreign intelligence facilities
• Cuban government benefits from portraying the embargo as the sole source of economic problems
• China and Russia benefit from maintaining strategic presence near US territories through their Cuban relationships ^{[2] [3]}