ShareThis Page

Trump & Cuba: Now hear this

| Thursday, Oct. 5, 2017, 8:55 p.m.
Staff stand within the U.S. embassy facility in Havana, Cuba.  (AP Photo | Desmond Boylan, File)
Staff stand within the U.S. embassy facility in Havana, Cuba. (AP Photo | Desmond Boylan, File)

It sounds like a subplot in a James Bond movie: U.S. diplomats in Cuba sickened by mysterious “sonic” attacks.

Reportedly, at least 22 U.S. embassy employees since November have suffered hearing loss, headaches and other conditions from what are described as acoustic attacks from an unknown source. Although the Trump administration has not blamed the Cuban government — and Havana denies any involvement — the president has announced the expulsion of almost two-thirds of Cuba's diplomatic corps in the U.S. The administration also has issued a travel warning for Americans planning to visit Cuba.

So naturally, apologists for President Obama's goodwill visit last year to the communist isle say President Trump is kicking dirt on diplomacy. But the dirt-kicking began with a fiery manifesto from Fidel Castro not long after Mr. Obama unpacked his bags from his Cuban excursion. The late Cuban dictator dissed Obama, excoriated the U.S. and insisted that America's embargo will not soon be forgotten.

Thereafter Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez called Obama's fence-mending “an attack on the foundation of our history, our culture and our symbols.”

Now nearly a year after the acoustic attacks began, Cuba has no explanation. And none likely will be forthcoming.

Mr. Trump's response is justified so long as the Castro regime and its inevitable heirs remain and continue their human-rights-stifling grip on Cuba.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.