Cuba Essays (1901 words) - CubaUnited States Relations, Fidel Castro

Cuba Kennedy's Fixation with Cuba Thomas G. Paterson Thomas G. Paterson's essay, Kennedy's Fixation with Cuba, is an essay primarily based on the controversy and times of President Kennedy's foreign relations with Cuba. Throughout President Kennedy's short term, he devoted the majority of his time to the foreign relations between Cuba and the Soviet Union. After the struggle of WW II, John F. Kennedy tried to keep a tight strong hold over Cuba as to not let Cuba turn to the Communist Soviet Union. Kennedy seen Cuba and the Soviet Union as a major threat to the United States. As Castro fell farther and farther into the Communist party, he inched his way closer and closer to becoming a close ally with the Soviet's, As Kennedy seen this happen before his eyes, he was astonished. Kennedy, a newly formed president, did not want to seem like the kind to just sit back and roll with the punches, he wanted immediate action taken for these measures. As someone said, Cuba was one of the four-letter words of the 1960s (268). Cuba was not viewed as a very potential power before Fidel Castro took office. It was viewed more as a neutral country that we sent aide and military supplies to in exchange for sugar and other products. When Castro took office, things drastically changed. He started taking back land that we had set aside for military bases, he wanted the American forces no more than what they had in Washington, and he openly defied orders from America. Unknown to Kennedy Khrushchev, leader of the Soviet Union, was also watching everything that played out between Cuba and the United States. President Kennedy, later realizing, would make a few decisions for the worst. These decisions would haunt him for the rest of his short lived term. Throughout the course of President Kennedy's term the few bad mistakes that he made would come back to haunt him. One such even that put a black mark on Kennedy's record was the whole Cuba uprising. At one point and time, as Kennedy was a senator, supported the Cuban uprising along with many other American's. They thought the uprising was a solid improvement over the oppressive rule of Batista. No where in this line of sight did anybody see the new government becoming Communist. As Castro took over Cuba, he became increasingly radical in his views and actions. When these actions came about, nobody ever suspected that the U.S. might be the ones that forced or led Castro to become the radical leader. The President rejected the idea that intense United States hostility to the Cuban Revolution may have contributed to Castro's tightening political grip and flirtation with the Soviet Union. Nor did Kennedy and other American's with to acknowledge the measurable benefits of the revolution?improvements in education, medical, care, and housing and the elimination of the island's infamous corruption that once had been the American mafia's domain. Instead, Kennedy officials concluded that Cuba's was a ?betrayed revolution' (Paterson 269). As the revolution unfolded day by day, it seemed as if we were not so much worried about Cuba itself, but the fact that everything has a tie in with the Cold War. The Soviets were trying to expand their horizons across the globe and Cuba was another opportunity for the Soviet's to step in and offer aide, military, and support in return for Cuba's Communism. Cuba came to represent the Cold War in the united States' backyard (Paterson 270). Some people felt that Kennedy was not all responsible for the trouble with Cuba. A lot of people believed that the majority of the problem from Cuba started with President Eisenhower. Kennedy's foreign policy troubles have sometimes been explained as inheritances from Eisenhower that shackled the new president with problems not of his own making. To be sure, Kennedy inherited the Cuban problem from Eisenhower (Paterson 272). Another event that was a tremendous backlash for the Kennedy administration was the Bay of Pigs. The Bay of Pigs was a covert operation that was organized by the CIA to overthrow Castro. From the very beginning, the Bay of Pigs was leading to be a disaster. The U.S. even tried to lie to the public

Plural Forms of English Nouns

Plural Forms of English Nouns Have you ever tried explaining to a child why two feet arent foots, or two mice arent mouses? Of course, the grownup response to such questions is, Thats just the way it is. As youngsters, we learned that most nouns in English change from singular to plural with the addition of -s or -es. But regardless of our age, its the few hundred exceptions that can be perplexing. Rule-breakers: mass nounssuch as mud, music, and peacewhich have no plural because they name things that cant readily be countednouns that show up only in the plural (called pluralia tantum)scissors, jeans, and congratulations, for examplea few nouns, like ox and child, that still rely on the Old English plural marker, -ena few other nouns (foot, mouse) that form the plural by changing a voweland several borrowed nouns that hold on to their foreign plural endingssuch as Latin alumni (or alumnae) and Greek criteria To illustrate some of these eccentric plural forms, here are two versions of an amusing little verse by our favorite poet, Author(s) Unknown. The English Lesson (version one) Well begin with a box, and the plural is boxes;But the plural of ox should be oxen not oxes.One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,Yet the plural of moose should never be meese.You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,But the plural of house is houses, not hice.If the plural of man is always called men,Why shouldnt the plural of pan be called pen?If I spoke of my foot and showed you my feet,When I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,Why shouldnt the plural of booth be called beeth?If the singular is this, and the plural is these,Why shouldnt the plural of kiss be kese?Then one may be that, and three would be those,Yet the plural of hat would never be hose.We speak of a brother and also of brethren,But though we say mother, we never say methren.So plurals in English, I think youll agree,Are indeed very trickysingularly. The English Lesson (version two) Now if mouse in the plural should be, and is, mice,Then house in the plural, of course, should be hice,And grouse should be grice and spouse should be spiceAnd by the same token should blouse become blice.And consider the goose with its plural of geese;Then a double caboose should be called a cabeese,And noose should be neese and moose should be meeseAnd if mamas papoose should be twins, its papeese.Then if one thing is that, while some more is called those,Then more than one hat, I assume, would be hose,And gnat would be gnose and pat would be pose,And likewise the plural of rat would be rose.