1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Anna35 [415]
3 years ago
8

What is Kennedy’s point of view about actions taking place in Cuba?

History
2 answers:
vladimir2022 [97]3 years ago
7 0
He doesn't support them
Advocard [28]3 years ago
3 0

Answer: Kennedy called the failed Bay of Pigs invasion a “colossal mistake.”

Explanation:

Upon taking office, Kennedy learned that a secret CIA operation approved by President Eisenhower was training 1,500 anti-Castro Cubans in Guatemala for an invasion of their homeland at the same time that the CIA was working with Mafia crime bosses in the United States to arrange for the assassination of Castro. Based on their assumption that the president would authorize the use of U.S. military forces if the Cuban exiles ran into trouble, the Joint Chiefs of Staff assured the inexperienced Kennedy that the invasion plan (Operation Trinidad) was theoretically feasible; CIA analysts predicted that the invasion would inspire Cubans to rebel against Castro and his Communist regime.

In reality, the covert operation had little chance of succeeding and was an explicit violation of international law. Secretary of State Rusk urged the president to cancel the dubious operation, but Kennedy willfully ignored such advice and approved the ill-fated invasion. When the ragtag force, led by an American, landed at the Bay of Pigs on the southern shore of Cuba on April 17, 1961, it was brutally subdued in two days; more than 1,100 men were captured. Four U.S. pilots were killed. Kennedy refused desperate requests from the anti-Castro invaders for the U.S. military support they had been promised.

A New York Times columnist lamented that Americans “looked like fools to our friends, rascals to our enemies, and incompetents to the rest.” Kennedy called the bungled Bay of Pigs invasion a “colossal mistake.” It was, he confessed to Richard Nixon, “the worst experience of my life. How could I have been so stupid?” The planners had underestimated Castro’s popularity and his ability to react to the surprise attack. The invasion also suffered from poor communication, inaccurate maps, faulty equipment, and ineffective leadership.

You might be interested in
What do we call the migration of the Jews all over the world?
tia_tia [17]

For generations, Jews across the globe have embraced a common, master narrative of Jewish migration in modern times that traces its origins to widespread acts of anti-Jewish violence, often referred to as pogroms, that propelled millions of Jews from the dark hinterlands of Eastern Europe into the warm, supportive embrace of their current, “Western” societies, ranging from the United States to Israel to Australia. In North America, Israel, and other new (or at the very least renewed) Jewish communities, definitive bastions of Jewish memory, society, and culture – like The National Museum of American Jewish History in Philadelphia and Beit Hatfutsot: The Museum of the Jewish People on Tel Aviv University's campus – tell and retell a widely-accepted narrative of Jewish migration in which Jews who flee violence and oppression in Eastern Europe are rescued, if not saved, by the very act of migration. In these, and innumerable other cases, Jewish migration in the modern era is repeatedly presented as a willful act of secular self-salvation. Mirroring and at times even bolstering the story of the biblical Exodus from ancient Egypt, these modern, secular versions of traditional Jewish accounts of slavery, flight, and redemption repeatedly serve as fundamental components of contemporary Jewish society, culture, and self.

In response to the prevailing influence of these and related myths of Jewish crisis, flight, and rescue, scholars as definitive as Salo Baron have long argued that the predominance of the so-called lachrymose conception of Jewish history ultimately warps popular and academic conceptions of both the Jewish past and present. As Baron noted in a retrospective essay first published in 1963: “[ … ] an overemphasis on Jewish sufferings distorted the total picture of the Jewish historic evolution and, at the same time, badly served a generation which had become impatient with the nightmare of endless persecutions and massacres.”1 Despite these and related attempts to revise the lachrymose conception of Jewish history as well as the large-scale social, political, and economic changes that have changed the very face of Jewish society over the past century and a half, the traditional historical paradigm of persecution, flight, and refuge continues to shape popular and even scholarly accounts of Jewish migration and history in modern times.2 The continued salience of this master narrative touches upon several key methodological questions in the study of Jewish migration and history. The first issue that the prominent place of anti-Jewish persecution and violence raises is the problematic, long-debated place of antisemitism as both a defining characteristic and driving force in the long course of Jewish history.3 A second issue related to the prominent place of anti-Jewish violence in popular and academic interpretations of Jewish history, in particular, and of European history, in general, is a parallel tendency to view the vast terrain of Eastern Europe as an area pre-destined to, if not defined by, inter-ethnic tensions, hatred, and violence.4 Lastly, the persecution, flight, and rescue narrative of Jewish migration and history very often ends up bolstering triumphalist views of the Jewish present, whether they be embraced and touted in New York, Tel Aviv, or Toronto.

7 0
2 years ago
What are the advantages of the doctrine of judicial percedent? are there any disadvantages?
yKpoI14uk [10]

Answer:

There are numerous advantages to the doctrine of judicial precedent. These advantages include;

1. It leads to certainty, consistency, and uniformity of laws.

2. It helps the court to save time, resources and energy since the court can easily refer an already decided case in which facts are similar to that which it is handling at the time in question.

3. It promotes fairness and justice where the facts of the present case are on all fours with that of an earlier decided case.

4. It leads to the quick and timely dispensation of justice.

The disadvantages are that:

1. It does not give room for judicial activism since it posits that already laid down judicial decision is to be followed, thus preventing legal development and advancement.

2. It leads to rigidity in the legal system and unnecessary restrictions on the advancement of the legal system.

Explanation:

Judicial Precedent otherwise known as the Doctrine of Stare Decisis is the principle of law that posit that court of lower jurisdiction are bound to follow the decisions of courts of higher jurisdiction that are on all fours with the matter that they are handling.

4 0
3 years ago
During the baroque era, the Catholic church required that religious art
DerKrebs [107]
Baroque artwork was lavish, dramatic, and awe inspiring. The goal of the movement for the Catholic Church was to create a sense of awe and teaching of the Catholic faith. At the time, Protestantism had taken foot and in order to demonstrate the power and glory of the Catholic Church, the papacy used baroque artwork to teach the stories of the bible and even demonstrate the tortures of hell. Many Europeans were unable to read and despite the bible beginning to be translated and more available, Catholics believed the word of God came from the Church. Therefore, the imagery helped to explain the stories of the faith without followers needing the ability to read. 
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What elements of creation does this myth explain check all that apply
Crank
The ability to think, water and land, fire, sun and air, people and animals
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The turned the tide of world war ii against germany
Anarel [89]

Answer: Many historians argue that <u>the battle of Stalingrad</u> turned the tide of World War II against Germany.

Explanation:

After the battle of Stalingrad (23 August 1942 – 2 February 1943), Germany publicly admitted defeat for the first time in war. After five months of fight, the Soviet Union finally defeated the Nazi Germany. Four months after the battle, American and Allied troops headed towards Normandy, and thus the liberation of Western Europe began on D-day ( 6 June 1944). The battle of Stalingrad remains the largest confrontation in World War II, with over 1 million Soviet and 800,000 German casualties.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Where were the four border states located in relation to the union and confederate states
    11·1 answer
  • What events spread the Latin American revolution​
    5·1 answer
  • What’s the significance of market demand curve?
    10·2 answers
  • What country was not involved in the age of European exploration
    11·1 answer
  • As the war for Independence began, Britain had the advantage of.....
    11·1 answer
  • Why was Martin Luther King so concerned by the issue of poverty in America?
    15·1 answer
  • ASAP&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any gr
    10·1 answer
  • HELPPPPPP
    11·2 answers
  • PASSAGE: "The new social system has only just been established and requires time for its consolidation. It must not be assumed t
    11·2 answers
  • How were war communism and the new economic policy different in their policies and their results
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!