Talk:Bay of Pigs Invasion/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Broken Link

This link: http://www.parascope.com/articles/1296/bayofpigs.htm is dead as of 4/29/07. Anyone who knows somehthing about it, please fix it. Also, please check Archive.org to see if the specific page was captured and archived. http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.parascope.com/articles/12(UTC)

---

Is this page just duplicating the content at Bay of Pigs?

No, it is content that was removed from Bay of Pigs (and thus separated from the talk page discussion of the invasion) and placed here for no apparent reason. Lacking any justification, I think I will give 24 hours notice and then move it back. Ortolan88 17:35 Feb 18, 2003 (UTC)

---

See National Security Archives site for concrete documentation.

If you have a good library find Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961-1963 Volume X, Cuba 1961-1962. Published by the State Department. You may also be able to find it on the State Department's web site.

\

B-26s shot down?

In the book that I am reading now (Derek Leebaert's The Fifty Year Wound), he talks about two US planes being shot down, but I didn't see this mentioned in the article.

As would be officially denied for seventeen years, CIA pilots also had perished during the invasion. Two unprotected, unmarked B-26s were shot down because no one on the CIA operations staff remembered that Nicaragua, whence they departed, is in the central time zone, whereas Cuba is in the eastern zon.

Can anyone back up this information with another source so I can insert it into the article?

This may be a confused reference to the B-26 flown by Arkansas National Guard pilots e.g. [1] El Jigüe 12-27-05

B-26's at the Bay of Pigs

For details regarding the air battle at the Bay of Pigs, please reference "Operation Puma" by Capt. Eduardo Ferrer. Ferrer's 1976 account of the events at the Bay of Pigs provides valuable details all too often summarized in incomplete or half true statements regarding aerial operations during the invasion.

As for the number of aircraft shot down. The number, was closer to 4.

As to where the aircraft came from. The aircraft and advisors were procured from the Alabama Air National Guard.

Please standby for further contributions to this article.

It was 4 planes that were shot down

In a desperate last-ditch effort to support the invasion, a limited air strike was approved on April 19, but it would not be enough, and four American pilots lost their lives that day. At 2:30 p.m., brigade commander "Pepe" Perez San Roman ordered radio operator Julio Monzon Santos to transmit a final message from brigade 2506. "We have nothing left to fight with, "San Roman said, his voice breaking, "how can you people do this to us, our people, our country? Over and out."

Without supplies or air cover, the invading forces fell. To them, the lack of air cover was a direct betrayal. In the end, 200 rebel soldiers were killed, and 1,197 others were captured.

"There's no question that the brigade members were competent, valiant, and committed in their efforts to salvage a rapidly deteriorating situation in a remote area," wrote Bissell. "Most of them had no previous professional military training, yet they mounted an amphibious landing and conducted air operations in a manner that was a tribute to their bravery and dedication. They did not receive their due."

From http://www.historyofcuba.com/history/baypigs/pigs5.htm

, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalton123 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Role of William Wieland

The role of high level State Department official William Wieland seems to have been critical.

William Wieland (aka Arturo Montenegro), was involved in the rise to power of Batista in 1933m and who would later appear on the scenes of the Bogotazo [2] and then was involved in the failure of the Bay of Pigs [3] when he had reached the level of Director of Middle American Affairs of the US State Department, then lobbying for the 1958 embargo on weapons for Batista [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. makes his diplomatic debut at this time as aide to Sumner Welles. Wieland is considered have a left of center record in Latin American matters [9]. Some sources (citing 245:6572 "State Department Security: The Case of William Wieland", 1962; 245:6573 State Department Security: Testimony of William Wieland", 1962; 245:6574 "State Department Security - 1963-65: The Wieland Case Updated", 1963-1965 [10]) report that in the 1930s William Wieland, known in Cuba as Arturo Montenegro, was intimate with Sumner Welles and his successor, Jefferson Caffery, thus promoting his successful career [11].

Trying to get more info, however, the topic William Wieland seems worthy of a little stub. el Jigüe 1/17/06

these references might also be of use:

Gill, William J 1969 The ordeal of Otto Otepka. Arlington House. ISBN 0870000543

Morrison, Fred 1965 The Otto F. Otepka case: Broadcasts on Three-star extra, "the newspaper of the air." ASIN B0007FVOLW el Jigüe 1/17/06

Nonsense

The idea that the Castro forces only had few armed sports planes at the Bay of Pigs Invasion (once in the International Law section) is absurd. This kind of misinformation denies any credibility to the author. The matter was corrected. There is a comment on one revision questioning the 1,500 estimate of militia killed in this action. Quite the contrary this is a low estimate some other figures run as high as 5,000. El Jigüe 1-27-06

Completely Neutral?

Reading this over, it seems as if there is a slight controversy between whos fault the Bay of Pigs invasion actually was. But there is no section which states this, and the blame seems to go all to the Kennedy administration, and there are a handful of times where the invasion is called a shameful debacle of the Kennedy administration and so forth...

Kennedy's role

The text blames Kennedy for the failure of this operation: "under Kennedy's orders critical details were changed that removed any chance of success of the mission without US help." It goes on to say that Kennedy changed the area chosen for the beach assault. I've never heard this before from anyone. Is there support in any reputable Kennedy biography? As far as I know, CIA pushed the plan, perhaps as a way to force overt US support against Castro, and Kennedy was not prepared to deny them. If there is no serious support for Kennedy's role, it should go. Telliott 23:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Kennedy did not like the intially proposed Trinidad plan, so he asked the CIA to come up with a new location. They came up with, three new locations and internally picked the Bay of Pigs, which they presented to Kennedy. He agreed with this, but requested some other changes. I can explain this in the article (in a few days, I'm sort of supposed to be working at this moment). All this information comes from Bay of Pigs:The Untold Story by Peter Wyden (the last source in the article's bibliography). FerralMoonrender (MyTalk • MyContribs • EmailMe) 02:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Muddy phrase

I have little idea what the last part of the intro means: "and now set about electoral conditions that favor the Republican Party". It needs to be rewritten. 62.31.55.223 17:40, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Out of place sentence?

The first sentence of the second paragraph appears to be out of place:

During debates in the United Nations Security Council, a Cuban attempt to condemn the US invasion failed due to a US veto. Gunboat diplomacy or direct military intervention by the US to overthrow the Cuban government would cause international protests against "interference with interior matters of foreign states" common in the atmosphere of the Cold War. [...]

The first sentence appears to be talking about discussions at the UN after the invasion, while the rest of a paragraph is about the geopolitical situation *before* the invasion. Am I just misunderstanding what is being said here? Molinari 20:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Sources?

I would like to know what sources were used when the author stated that this operation was pushed by Nixon, and that Nixon feared his involvement would surface come election time. Such assertions should not be made without credibility

You're absolutely right, so I removed:

Vice President Richard Nixon, not Eisenhower, reportedly pushed the plan forward.

If someone can get a citation, feel free to restore it. Jtpaladin 19:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This is confirmed in Bay of Pigs:The Untold Story by Peter Wyden (the last source in the article's bibliography). I haven't added the info back in, because I don't know exactly what was removed. If someone wan'ts to do that, go ahead. Otherwise I'll add some stuff about it in a few days. FerralMoonrender (MyTalk • MyContribs • EmailMe) 02:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

A few steps beyond slanted?

This page should be locked, the historical documents reviewed, and some attempt made to clean up the garbage. The well known facts of the Bay of Pigs invasion begin with it was concocted during the Eisenhower administration and CIA brass lied to the incoming Kennedy administration and obfuscated their reports so that Kennedy's administration were fooled into extending provisional support for a clearly doomed project. Not that Kennedy wasn't easily prey to anti-Castro schemes, but no one acquainted with the facts of the scheme expected success. Read the CIA report. Of course all the auto-biographies of Kennedy administration members touch on the topic as well.

There's an awful lot of "Kennedy aministration subverted it this way, Kennedy administration subverted it that way", none of which can be supported by historical reference because it's simply untrue. Most of the cited changes originated within the CIA. Lord knows there's plenty to criticise about the Kennedy administration, but we do ourselves no favors by blindly incorporating Ann Coulter's speeches into the project.

"Under Kennedy's orders critical details were changed that removed any chance of success of the mission without US help." So, author is alleging there was some other never-published plan in which the invasion could succeed without US help? etc.

imho: the failure of the CIA was primarily one of wishful thinking and groupthink, somewhat akin to cherry-picking intelligence failures w/ Chalabi (an Iranian agent) leading up to the Iraq war. The failure of the Kennedy Administration seems to me more like the Columbia disaster or 9/11: there were people on the inside who suspected the truth in time, but out of a fear of violating protocols, tromping on toes, offending other agencies they (or their bureaucratic superiors) ended up letting it all play out.

I also think these exile-driven schemes should get some demographic analysis. In part the Bay of Pigs was about former plantation owners lobbying Congressmen and officials to help them reclaim their family property, but to what extent was it motivated by a desire to return to the plantation lifestyle?

structure is wack

that intro is way too long and doesn't get into the meat of what happened. castro's in the hospital and the ny times article mentioned 1100 captured in the bay of pigs. i was all like "WTF?! 1100?! i thought it was much smaller" and am looking forward to reading the rest of the article. however the intro sort of turned me off to it; it seems to be missing a pithy statement about what happened, estimates of casualties etc. the "setting the tone for the republicans in cuba" is interesting but should be way further down on the page, as imho much of the intro ought to be. just my $.02

The article is indeed scattered and unclear. I'll do what I can to clarify.--Zleitzen 13:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Huh?

"It is generally presumed by some that during the Bay of Pigs Invasion Cuba's losses were high. Triay (2001 p. 110) mentions 4,000,000,000 casualties; Lynch (p. 148 50X or about 5,000). Other sources indicate over 2,200 casualties. 7 infantry battalions were eliminated." uhh, 4 billion Cuban casualties? --88.112.30.245 18:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

wow, Cuba is like China then.

What is the section "It is obvious that we must completely destroy them.SOON. This is your mission. DO IT NOW.NOW!" about? Can we not delete this?

Vandalism really seem to be the game in town nowadays.

Who paid for release of prisoners?

The German version of this article points out that the money (53 million $) to give machinery, medications etc. to Cuba in exchange for the ~1100 POWs was not paid by the US government but had to be brought up by the relatives and supporters of the exiles themselves. This english article, however, makes it appear as if the US paid for it. Please clarify if you know the details. Tempel 15:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Soviet Advisors to Cuban forces

Castro militia, artillery, and intelligence service were trained and directed by Spanish speaking Hispano-Russian officers, by Raul Castro's admission these were necessary to field a regular army [12]; the most senior of these were Francisco Ciutat de Miguel, Enrique Lister, and Alberto Bayo (Paz, 2001, pp 189-199). Ciutat de Miguel (Masonic name: Algazel; Russian name: Pavel Pablovich Stepanov; Cuban alias: Ángel Martínez Riosola) is said to have arrived the same day as La Coubre explosion was wounded in the foot during the War Against the Bandits, the type of wound that is common to senior officers observing combat at the edge of effective rifle range. Date of wound is not given in references cited [13], [14].

Che Guevara was in Oriente Province (or was it Pinar del Rio) lured away by Nino Diaz’s feints. El Jigue 2-5-07

Cover up of Soviet Involvement

Ignoring referenced additions there has been an attempt to coverup Soviet involvement in Bay of Pigs Invasion even though one of the references is to a Cuban Government source quoting Raul Castro. El Jigue 2-7-07208.65.188.149 19:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Air action

Aviation is commonly considered the deciding factor during the Bay of Pigs Invasion. The first airplane of the Cuban Armed forces was obtained in 1913; Cuban pilots, such as Francisco Terry Sánchez and Santiago Campuzano fought combat missions as early as WW I [15]. The 1931 Gibara landing against Machado was defeated in great part by Cuban Aviation [16]. However, by the end of January 1959 most Cuban pilots and support technicians from the Batista era were in jail [17] or in exile.

During the Bay of Pigs invasion, the first Cuban exile attack with B-26 left Castro forces with "two B-26C, two Sea Furies, and two T-33A at San Antonio de los Baños Airbase, and only one Sea Fury at the Antonio Maceo Airport" and two of the attacking bombers were damaged [18]

Some Castro pilots Alvaro Galo (fired his rockets into the water Lagas p. 93) and Willy Figueroa were jailed for cowardice (see also ibid p. 04), for not flying B-26 (Lagas p. 60); Captain Evans was accused of poisoning crews and also jailed (Lagas, p. 89).

Castro force pilots included Carlos Ulloa Arauz who was Nicaraguan; Jaques Lagas who flew a B-26 and survived is from Chile' Alfredo Noa died in battle in a plane piloted by Luis A. Silva Tablada (ibid p. 61) also killed (ibid p. 63). Of course Rafael del Pino (ibid p. 64). de Varens died in a B-26 accident in Camaguey (ibid p. 90). Laga (ibid p. 78) lists dead Castro fliers as: Noa, Silva, Ulloa (also p. 104), Martin Torres (ibid p. 97), Reinaldo Gonzalez Calainada (ibid p. 97), and Orestes Acosta (in Santiago flying a T-33). On page 81 Lagas mentions Enrique Carrera Rola (T-33) and Gustavo Borzac (a Seafury pilot, who did not fire his rockets, ibid p. 98).

On page 82 Lagas mentions 16 exile planes in first attack, presumable B-26 bombers. Kraus mentions eight B-26 piloted by Cuban exiles [19]. Lagas (p. 88) mentions Castro pilot Alberto Fernandez (T-33). Juan Suarez Plaza (B-26 ibid p. 109) Ernesto Carrera is mentioned as flying a Seafury (ibid p. 108), and another Nicaraguan (ibid p.137); Seafuries were also flown by Castro pilots including Douglas Rood and Sanchez de Mola (Lagas p. 59). Lagas (p. 121) states he was the only B-26 pilot left on the 19th of April. By April 21 ten of twelve exile B-26B had been destroyed [20], this seems to have been when the four US pilots (Alabama National Guard pilots?). replacing exhausted Cuban exile pilots were killed. Eight Castro pilots survived, only one from the B-26 (Lagas p. 141). El Jigue 2-15-07208.65.188.149 18:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

There are problems, for instance the reference:

Klaus, Erich 2003 (accessed 2-15-07) Cuba Air Force History. Aeroflight Countries of the World. http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/americas/cuba/Cuba-af-history.htm

mentions Mirage Jet fighter in Angola where there were apparently none:

e.g. "The MiG-23MLs consider that the first Mirage has been shot down and attempt to pursue the fleeing Mirage, but they had already reached the limit of their fuel supply, and had to head back to base"

this and other material in his paper suggest that he is uncritically accepting Cuban Government material. However, the material on this matter is difficult to obtain, El Jigue 2-15-07208.65.188.149 21:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC) There are problems, for instance the reference:

Klaus, Erich 2003 (accessed 2-15-07) Cuba Air Force History. Aeroflight Countries of the World. http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/americas/cuba/Cuba-af-history.htm

mentions Mirage Jet fighter in Angola where there were apparently none:

e.g. "The MiG-23MLs consider that the first Mirage has been shot down and attempt to pursue the fleeing Mirage, but they had already reached the limit of their fuel supply, and had to head back to base"

this and other material in his paper suggest that he is uncritically accepting Cuban Government material. However, the material on this matter is difficult to obtain, El Jigue 2-15-07208.65.188.149 21:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC) There are problems, for instance the reference:

Klaus, Erich 2003 (accessed 2-15-07) Cuba Air Force History. Aeroflight Countries of the World. http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/americas/cuba/Cuba-af-history.htm

mentions Mirage Jet fighter in Angola where there were apparently none:

e.g. "The MiG-23MLs consider that the first Mirage has been shot down and attempt to pursue the fleeing Mirage, but they had already reached the limit of their fuel supply, and had to head back to base"

this and other material in his paper suggest that he is uncritically accepting Cuban Government material. However, the material on this matter is difficult to obtain, El Jigue 2-15-07208.65.188.149 21:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

There are problems, for instance the reference:

Klaus, Erich 2003 (accessed 2-15-07) Cuba Air Force History. Aeroflight Countries of the World. [21]

mentions Mirage Jet fighter in Angola where there were apparently none:

e.g. "The MiG-23MLs consider that the first Mirage has been shot down and attempt to pursue the fleeing Mirage, but they had already reached the limit of their fuel supply, and had to head back to base"

this and other material in his paper suggest that he is uncritically accepting Cuban Government material. However, the material on this matter is difficult to obtain...El Jigue 2-15-07208.65.188.149 21:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

71.75.180.42 deletes concurrent actions without comment

Contributor 71.75.180.42 deleted: "Very active in this period e.g. April 3rd 1961 bomb attack on milicia barracks in Bayamo kills four militia and eight more are wounded; April 6th Hershey Sugar factory in Matanzas is destroyed by sabotage; April 18th Directorio guerrilla Marcelino Magaňaz dies in action in Sierra Maestra (Corzo, 2003 p. 79-89)."

No comment or explanation was offered. Since contributor 71.75.180.42 has no previous record of activity and since war activity during this period was not limited to the Bay of Pigs, would this contributor be so kind as to explain her/his actions. El Jigue 2-17-07208.65.188.149 16:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

'Who Is Mister Morgan?'

The link "William Morgan" points to a disambiguation page which contains no suitable Morgan (guess, he was neither the Medal of Honor recipient killed in Vietnam, nor the translator of Bible). Perhaps, the link should be coloured in red or Cuban Morgan should be added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Morgan ? Guess, the same confusion holds true for all Cuban revolution-related articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.128.67.199 (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

Hagerman see [[22]] I put him there eons ago. El Jigue 2-20-07208.65.188.149!

Btw Note:

• Franqui, Carlos 1984 (foreword by G. Cabrera Infante and translated by Alfred MacAdam from Spanish 1981 version) Family portrait with Fidel. 1985 edition Random House First Vintage Books, New York. ISBN 0394726200 p. 56 Guevara ”surrenders” to Camilo during la ofensiva. p. 123 “We lost a lot of men. This frontal attack of men against machines (the enemy tanks) had nothing to do with guerrilla war; in fact it was a Russian tactic, probably the idea of the two Soviet generals, both of Spanish origin (they fought for the Republic in the Spanish Civil War and fled to the Soviet Union to later fight in World War II. One of them was a veteran, a fox named Ciutah* (*p. 182 a.k.a. Ángel Martínez). He was sent by the Red Army and the Party as an advisor and was the father of the new Cuban army. He was the only person who could have taken charge of the Girón campaign. The other Hispano-Russian general was an expert in antiguerrilla war who ran the Escambray cleanup. But the real factor in our favor at Girón was the militias: Almejeira’s column embarked on a suicide mission, they were massacred but they reached the beach.”

• de Paz-Sánchez, Manuel 2001 Zona de Guerra, España y la revolución Cubana (1960-1962), Taller de Historia, Tenerife Gran Canaria ISBN 8479263644 pp. 198-203, analyzes the career of Francisco Ciutat de Miguel (correct spelling). El Jigue 2-20-07208.65.188.149 01:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hagerman Mr. Morgan is William Alexander Morgan El Jigue 2-21-07208.65.188.149 15:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Fabian tactics

In what surely is not a process of Fabian alterations, the reference to (Paz-Sanchez, 2001, pp 189-199) was removed. No claim of malice can be inferred from that; however, such a tactic could be used to claim there is no reference, to the particular point made (the introduction of Soviet Block military advisors into Cuba) and then in a third step the complete topic could be removed. Let is be "careful out there!" El Jigue 208.65.188.149 15:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

British Intelligence failures in Cuba

As in WWII information of the resistance in the Balkans, the British seemed equally uninformed as to the circumstances in Cuba in 1961. Speculation that this was due to contamination by Castro Agents (as communist sources contaminated British WWII intelligence in the Balkans) is not appropriate here since I am not aware that such information has surfaced. Thus I limited myself to inserting more recent evidence of actions that although pertinent did not appear in British Reports of the time. "More recent analysis suggest that, probably because of the Castro government's almost complete blackout of actions outside of Havana, the sources such as those used in the Ormsby-Gore intelligence estimate were not aware of the following related material: On April 14, 1961, the guerrillas of Agapito Rivera fought Cuban government forces near Las Cruces, Montembo, Las Villas, several goverment forces were killed and others wounded . On April 16, Merardo and Jose Leon plus 14 others staged armed rising at Las Delicias Estate in Las Villas, only four survived Leonel Martinez and 12 others took to the country side (ibid). On the 17th of April 1961 Osvaldo Ramírez then chief of the rural resistance to Castro (see War Against the Bandits) was captured in Aromas de Velázquez and immediately executed. [23] The ruthlessness with which this resistance was suppressed is well described in Franqui . On April 3, 1961, a bomb attack on militia barracks in Bayamo killed four militia and eight more are wounded; on April 6, the Hershey Sugar factory in Matanzas is destroyed by sabotage; on April 18, Directorio guerrilla Marcelino Magaňaz died in action in Sierra Maestra. On April 19 at least seven Cubans plus two US citizens Angus K. McNair and Howard F. Anderson are executed in Pinar del Rio Province.. However, the general Cuban population was not well informed, except for CIA funded Radio Swan [24] Pirate radio in Central America and Caribbean Sea, since May of 1960 almost all means of public communication were in the government’s hands . El Jigue208.65.188.149 18:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Republic of Cuba forces?

Since it is difficult, in the absence of legitimizing elections to sustain that Castro's forces owed allegance to the Republic of Cuba, thus I have requested a reference and at least until this matter is resolved reworded thus:

"The government initially reported their army losses as 87 dead with many more wounded. The number of those killed in action in Cuba's army during the battle eventually ran to 140, and then finally to 161. Thus in the most accepted calculations, a total of around 2,000 (perhaps as many as 5,000, see above) Cuban militia fighting in the Castro forces may have been killed, wounded or missing in action."

El Jigue208.65.188.149 20:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

El C. Saw your reversion from "Republic of Cuba" from "Castro forces" and wondered if you would like to defend it, as it seem to me having no legal basis to be mere POV. El Jigue 208.65.188.149 16:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Angelito

EJ, Fransisco "Angelito" Ciutat was not a commander of Cuban forces during the bay of Pigs invasion. Nor was he a Soviet as implied by the infobox. He was a Spanish Communist sent by the Soviet based international Communist Party to help the training of guerillas for future insurgency battles abroad. The infobox is misleading to say that (a) he was a commander and (b) Cuban forces were trained by Soviet advisers. Evidence of a small clique of foreign Communists in Cuba around that time working with guerilla groups is not evidence that they were organising largescale training of military forces, nor that it has any equivalence to the CIA's backing of the invading forces. By the way, EJ, here is a video about Spanish fighters in the Cuban revolution that is interesting [25].-- Zleitzen^(talk) 18:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

That interpretation is subjective and appears to rely too much on official Cuban government histories. To test this try to reconstruct the Castro high command and order of battle. One has to have to realize there simply were too few experienced Cuban commanders and these were not used to deploying tanks and artillery. While technically the Cuban leadership was in control, they had no experience in that kind of command and were very bad at it. The Cuban aircommand was most mostly piloted by foreigners. The place was a disaster until the Hispano Soviet advisors (Ciutat was also a Soviet General in WWII and if memory of reading servers, also in Yugoslavia) who had been mostly in the soviet block since 1939, that is about 21 years. Bayo and Lister, as their tactics proved Spain, G-d only knew to repeat the mistakes they made in Spain, repeated with enormous losses on the Eastern Front in WWII, and failing miserably after WWII trying to raid Franco held Spain, were only good at "training" militia to carry out suicidal charges and to capture and kill civilians. The remaining Cuban rebel leadership (which was thin anyway and much diminished by this time (Huber Matos was in jail, Camilo Cienfuegos dead his brothers inexperienced, his command fragmented and expended in expeditions especially to the Dominican Republic etc.) Some of the remaining Castro inconditionals had been killed in the Escambray. Those remaining Almeida (who was very brave but barely literate had no training as a regular army general), Almejieras, Rodriguez Puerta, Universo Sanchez (already a broken man riddled with delayed stress syndrome) etc had no experience in large scale commands. First hand reports (see Franqui for instance), suggest that everybody seems to have been confused. Castro seems to have been screaming orders, and the militia were dying. On scene Almeijieras was a drug dazed incompetent (he would be jailed for that later), Rodriguez Puerta was somewhat better but not by much. Even the Che, in my view was a military incompetent, who stole credit from all and sundry, as he proved to be in Africa and Bolivia, was not there. The tactics were clearly Soviet mass action attacks, and hence the result was disproportionally high losses. El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Though what you say may have much value, EJ, to say that Ciutat was a commander will need some serious verifiable sourcing. I have scoured the books and other sources and have not found that anywhere.-- Zleitzen^(talk) 22:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Z: Thank you I used the work of Manuel de la Paz (he has the greatest detail on Ciutat, he used various pseudonyms), Franqui and Juan Vives (he misspells Ciutat) among others (if they have not been removed the citations the above authors should be cited in this article). The trouble seems to be that these references are not commonly found written in English. El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've been meaning to get hold of Carlos Franqui's Diary of the Cuban Revolution for a while now, but I've been caught up in other things. But do these sources state that Ciutat was a commander? That seems too big a point to appear in some major sources but not others.-- Zleitzen^(talk) 23:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Z: try to get hold of de Paz-Sánchez, Manuel 2001 Zona de Guerra, España y la revolución Cubana (1960-1962), Taller de Historia, Tenerife Gran Canaria ISBN 8479263644 El Jigue208.65.188.149 03:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hidden censors strike again

"JohnHistory" has just deleted Carlos Franqui's remarks. No comment just a deletion. Interesting. Dunno if "John" knows who Carlos Fanqui is. El Jigue208.65.188.149 18:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Major deletions continue without explanation, apparently under cover of correcting a sudden increase in "vandalism" El Jigue 208.65.188.149 18:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You gave no page number or citation for your quote, and it seemed very slanted calling the hispanic/russian general (with no link to, or evidence of his existence) a "fox" and so forth. I tend to be very skeptical of a hispanic/russian Red Army general, with no link to his name, and obviously being glorifed as a "fox". Who are these hispanic/russian Red Army generals? At least give a page number, when quoting along with a citation to the source. With such a famous general as him being called a "fox" would imply, and with his very unusual origins (russian/cuban descent?) I find it a tad bit sketchy. Why not start an article on him, and the other hispanic/russian generals, and then work your way up to this article. That is to say, start from the ground up. Thanks! JohnHistory 22:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)JohnHistory

JohnHistory one probably can presume by now that you found the reference in this page, and saw the new page on Francisco Ciutat de Miguel. El JIgue 208.65.188.149 13:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Lame Article

This article is weak. Could a native English speaker please edit it to ensure that it actually makes sense? Also, for the general reader(i.e., not a cold war historian)it is impossible to read more than a few sentences at a time without having to click on a link for some obscure background information. Is that really the point of an encyclopedia? Shouldn't the article stand on its own, without the need to constantly cross-reference. If you want to write a book, then write a book. -68.251.146.39 22:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Specific comments might be more useful El Jigue208.65.188.149 15:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Really uneutral

Older version of this article were better informed. Before some 'illiterated' and missinformed people put some incorrect facts by some incorrect sources.

Che Guevara's involvement?

Didn't Guevara command as well at this military engagement? Speedboy Salesman 20:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

No he did not he was in Oriente province decoyed by Nino Diaz's fake landing force; will get reference later. El Jigue 208.65.188.149 22:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Was apparently incorrect Nino Diaz was off the Oriente coasts however, Guevara was in Pinar del Rio Province several hundred miles away to the west:

"?Nino Diaz leads a group of 160 men in the diversionary landing 30 miles east of Guantanamo. The landing is aborted. The reasons given are the failure to appear of a friendly reception party and the loss of three boats. The Cubans are ordered to land the following night (April 15/16). Again the 168 men do not land because of the breakdown of a reconnaissance boat and loss of time retrieving it, failure of a friendly landing party to appear, and heavy enemy activity in the area. The Diaz group is ordered to join the main invasion force but they fail to arrive in time to participate. (Sequence of Events, 5/3/61)

?State security agents arrest an internal resistance group made up of 15 persons led by a North American, Howard Frederick Anderson. The agents discover eight tons of hidden arms consisting of 40 cases of rifles, 12 cases of automatic weapons, 18 cases of Thompson machine guns, as well as mortars and plastic explosives. (Molina, "Diario de Girón." p. 127)

?In Pinar del Rio, "Che" Guevara states: "We do not know if this attack will be the prelude to the announced invasion of the five thousand worms (gusanos) . . . We have to be prepared for a long and hard war." (lnforme Especial: 1961) "

See [26]

However, Efigenio Almejeiras was there directing the national police, intoxicated with marijuana, he merely had them charge, they took heavy loses (as is described by Franqui, in the article). El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Unless some citation can be found to support the presence of Guevara at the battle site, it might be wise to removing Guevara from list of those involved in Bay of Pigs Invasion El Jigue 208.65.188.149 16:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Illegal and unconstitutional military Action

i would like all of the unconstitutional covert military actions to be listed as so. the US government is and has been unconstitutional.

your correct but the officials did it for survival and security, and to keep americans way of life

Under the US constitution the US President has the power to make war. El Jigue 208.65.188.149 22:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

This matter seems more nuanced than I first thought still:

First paragraph in Article 2 Section 2 of the constitution reads:

"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, the situation is a bit more complicated, because the Framers did not envision a standing army; they saw the U.S. as being defended by militia ("when called into the actual Service"). Thus, originally it was Congress that could call the militia, giving much more teeth to its power over declaring war; "Commander in Chief" didn't mean so much when there was no army without Congress' say-so.JSoules 16:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Revolutionary tone

The tone of this article is anti-Castro and anti-revolutionary. I understand that emotions are strong in both camps but Wikipedia is not the place to push for one side or the other.

Please give details and citations to support your analysis of this article. El Jigue208.65.188.149 02:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Where is the FBI ?

One strange thing about this article is that there is no mention made of the FBI. I know it has become a non- fact in modern America, but weren’t the FBI a major factor in the bay of pigs?. I know it has little status today and was really no more than a rumour anyway but when things are boiled down to bare "facts" the real truth often disappears.

It was said that the FBI had acted - under Hoover - to protect Castro. That they had already stopped several assassination attempts, that they had tipped the Cubans off about the invasion and that they even sent them "military advisors" to help them fend off the invaders. It was said to be the closest the CIA and FBI came to actual physical warfare.

If you are wondering why, its because they saw the CIA as basically criminals who were subverting democracy by illegal, secret, corrupt and "evil" actions. In the sixties and seventies the FBI had a lot of influence over the film industry and Hollywood - look at "The Men from UNCLE" or the later "The Parallax View". The Men from UNCLE might appear funny but it apparently carried every secret the CIA knew, including where their secret headquarters was hidden.

I remind you that the CIA from the early sixties was the same organisation that may have been connected to the killing of Kennedy, Harvey Milk, or maybe even Martin Luther King or Malcolm X.

Lucien86 07:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia, not modern America. Do you mean the hemisphere, the northern continent, or the country USA? If we are supplying OR, isn't the FBI solely concerned with US domestic affairs? Did they break the law? You discuss what appears to be The Man from U.N.C.L.E. but neglect the illegal, secret, corrupt and idiotic Get Smart. Reliable and verifiable sources please. Franamax 11:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Leadership vacuum in Cuban government air-force

Rafael del Pino (a participant in the air battle_ writes that during the Bay of Pigs the Cuban government air-forces were commanded by "Maro" Guerra Bermejo, (former driver for Raul Castro) whose incompetent orders were ignored, and was replaced by Raúl Curbelo Morales. Rafael del Pino also talks about the appearance, apparently Soviet 'secret police in those days.'

• "Del Pino, Rafael 2002 (accessed 9-5-07) Como te paga un dictador. March 2 2002 at 9:12 PM http://www.network54.com/Forum/59476/thread/1015117960/last-1015117960/COMO+TE+PAGA+UN+DICTADOR

“ En mayo de 1960, apenas un año y medio después de asumir Fidel Castro el poder, la aviación fue diezmada. Quedamos sólo 8 pilotos de combate. Después de purgar a la mayoría de los oficiales procedentes de la clase media, Raúl Castro nombró jefe de la Fuerza Aérea a su chofer personal, Guerra Bermejo, más conocido por Maro, cuya inteligencia no alcanzaba ni a la de Mike Tyson. Lo más curioso no era cómo Maro daba las órdenes, sino cómo nosotros no las cumplíamos. Cuando Bahía de Cochinos, el 17 de abril de 1961, los ocho pilotos que quedábamos en la fuerza aérea entablamos combate por iniciativa propia, sin dirección alguna. Fue al segundo día que Fidel Castro envió a alguien más preparado y con autoridad, al ministro de Comunicaciones, Raúl Curbelo Morales, para que sustituyera a Maro. La acción de nuestra fuerza aérea salvó la situación militar, pero descubrió un secreto. Días después supimos que en Checoslovaquia había ya un grupo de hijos de la vieja guardia comunista para que se entrenaran como pilotos y que eventualmente nos sustituirían. De los ocho pilotos murieron dos, junto con la tripulación de un B-26. En aquellos días aparecieron los instructores revolucionarios, variante de los comisarios políticos soviéticos, personaje que entre ustedes podría aparecer como el instructor bolivariano. Paralelo entró el contra-inteligente --oficial de contrainteligencia. Tenían la sagrada misión de detectar a los espías. Después descubrimos que cada oficial tiene un dossier donde se les investigan hasta las relaciones amorosas. El teléfono y la correspondencia pierden la privacidad y se convierten en una fuente de detección de ``desviaciones ideológicas.”"

In the next few days I will post reference to Norberto Fuentes account of the sinking of Cuban government ship "Baire" docked at the mouth of Rio de las Casas (principal river in Isle of Pines) which involved a great number of Cuban government casualties. El Jigue208.65.188.149 13:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Guevara did not show significant leadership during Bay of Pigs

Unless somebody can show Guevara's leadership role during the Bay of Pigs invasion, his name should be removed from leadership sidebar. El Jigue208.65.188.149 14:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Content of "Soviet Advisors" Section

As of 16 Sep07 contains 4 sentences.

Sentence 1: not inspected

Sentence 2 & 3: "Ciutat de Miguel...Bandits. Date of wound...not...cited"

What does this have to do with Bay of Pigs? The citations in the article and talk page are all Spanish language; use of very crude web translation tools reveal nothing about Bay of Pigs, for that matter neither "foot" nor "wound" appear. Can "El Jigue" clarify why this is relevant? The included Wiki reference to Francisco Ciutat de Miguel should stand on its own (stubbish) merits.

4th & last sentence: (lots of problems)

"Hispano-Soviets" - reviewing the 2 relevant English-language of 4 Google hits, these clearly reference orphans sent to the USSR after the Spanish Civil War (or non-orphans placed in orphanages). There is no match between names in the Google hits and names in the Wiki article. 208.65.188.149 has introduced a term without supporting its provenance.

"presumed communist Robert Herboldt" - presumed by who (or whom)?

- inspection of the supplied citations to "Brothers in Arms" reveal only that the movie concerns Robert Herboldt. The phrase "After the events of the Bay of Pigs" appears once - this does not confirm involvement in Bay of Pigs. The two citations are both clearly movie reviews. Whilst a documentary movie could be considered as a SS (but not a RSS?), reviews of the movie must always be considered WP:SYNTH and WP:POV. 208... has possibly viewed the movie themselves, unfortunately this is WP:OR and not encyclopedic.

"ability to read English" - whereas one of the cited ref's says "knowledge of Afrikaans proved invaluable" - ???

"presumed confidence that the Castro government had in him" - again, presumed by who/whom?

208.65.188.149 aka "El Jigue" may have intimate knowledge of these very unfortunate events; but these are POV and/or OR and must be qualified with verifiable references, ideally English-language (for the en.wiki) and not internet-based - that will quell any arguments against 208's edits. Franamax 01:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

As of 21Sep07 removed the Brothers/Herboldt reference. Sentence 2&3 will go soon unless there is some community input.

I am worried about the formatting effect of cutting "Soviet Advisers" to one sentence as there is a text box beside it. I will be bold but may also be messy. A more skilled surgeon may wish to excise this content. Franamax 10:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I could not respond earlier El_C had me blocked again El_Jigue208.65.188.149 23:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

As to the challenge to sources on Francisco Ciutat de Miguel prior and during this Invasion. The quoted source is (Paz-Sanchez, 2001, pp 189-199) de Paz-Sánchez, Manuel 2001 Zona de Guerra, España y la revolución Cubana (1960-1962), Taller de Historia, Tenerife Gran Canaria ISBN 8479263644

Professor Manuel de Paz Sanchez is an eminent Spanish historian, with residence in Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Canary Island. He writes prolifically and has writen many historical articles and books. Google lists 510 citations to him. Professor de Paz is one of the most eminent historians on recent events in Cuba. Lists of some of his work are found at

http://www.edicionesidea.com/aplicacion/autores/ver.asp?ID=510 http://www.edicionesidea.com/aplicacion/autores/ver.asp?ID=241

Publications of Prof de Paz include:

Manuel de Paz Sánchez et al.: El Bandolerismo en Cuba. Presencia canaria y protesta rural, 2 vols., Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 1994.

M. de Paz Sánchez: “‘Maten canarios hasta que se les canse el brazo’: la presencia canaria en Cuba hasta la crisis de 1933”, revista Del Caribe, Santiago de Cuba, 1996, nº 25, pp. 63-73.

PAZ SÁNCHEZ, M. de: Wangüemert y Cuba, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 1991 y 1992, 2 vols.

PAZ SÁNCHEZ, M. de: Zona rebelde. La diplomacia española ante la Revolución cubana (1957-1960), C. C. P. C. , Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 1997.

Manuel de Paz Sanchez Zona De Guerra: Espana Y La Revolucion Cubana, 1960-1962 b(8479263644 9788479263645 84-7926-364-4)

Manuel de Paz Sanchez La Ciudad: Una Historia Ilustrada De Santa Cruz De La Palma by (8479264276 9788479264277 84-7926-427-6)

HERNÁNDEZ GONZÁLEZ, M. y M. de PAZ SÁNCHEZ: "Caballero Sarmiento y Canarias. Notas sobre un comerciante ilustrado", A.E.A., nº 31, Madrid-Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 1985, pp. 457-476.

As to Ronald Herbolt he was in the Bay of Pigs area at the time of the encounter, which is something one cannot say of the Che Guevara as previously pointed out.

There is no question that Ronald Herboldt was a communist since he held medium high level positions in the Cuban government where such is a requirement. A more open topic is whether he was a communist at the time he arrived in Cuba, or during the Bay of Pigs Invasion (this is probable because he was quarter master a position of considerable responsibility. Several other points are not clear one the report that the ship he took to Cuba apparently carried manganese ore (not sugar)to South Africa, why I do not know, this mineral is as common in South Africa as Cuba, as is sugar.

"In 1958 Frank Wilkinson (788) abandoned his farming activities in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) to become Navigation Officer at Gordon's Bay. Some ten years earlier Frank had been Master of the "Constantia" - one of the three Victory ships which inaugurated trading by the newly established South African Marine Corporation. The vessel's first round trip from the United States was not without mishap. After dropping the pilot off Durban at the commencement of the return voyage, the "Constantia" struck and "uncharted" object in the vicinity of the north breakwater and was forced to return to port with its full cargo of manganese ore. Repairs were carried out without dry-docking, using the new technique of underwater welding - a first in South Africa."

from Old Boy's Association of the S A T GENERAL BOTHA S (accessed 9-17-07) Search results for Constantia http://www.generalbotha.co.za/ (this can be inferred to be a right wing source, but I do not know this for certain).

Herboldt is commonly described as being a Person of Color this is not readily sustained by the only photograph I have found of him (or of an actor playing his role) see page 24 of Tri continental film vestival 2007 held in Cape Town www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/files/TCFF07progFINAL.pdf

I do not mean to challenge Prof. Paz Sanchez' scholarly status and I am not competent to examine Spanish language sources. Use of these sources is problematic in the English Wikipedia as it prevents the English-speaking user from verifying the source directly, instead having to rely on the assertions of others. However this is not the main concern.

The more fundamental question is why are the two sentences in this article at all? What do they have to do with the Bay of Pigs? I would certainly encourage that they be moved to the Francisco Ciutat de Miguel article - that would improve both articles. I can't move the information myself, I don't read Spanish, I can't verify the information. All I can do is eventually take the two sentences out to improve the Bay of Pigs article.

Ronald Herboldt - again, where is the verifiable, reliable source? How is he relevant to the Bay of Pigs article? Why would this be in the "Soviet Advisors" section? Franamax 04:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

To remove Francisco Ciutat de Miguel the principal Hispano-Soviet adviser (Bayo and others apparently played a subordinate role)from the Bay of Pigs article would be as unwise as to remove all US advisers from the same article. To do this is to capitulate to Cuban government propaganda in which all wise Cuban leaders lead a devoted following in repelling the invaders. In reality despite the presence of Soviet Advisors, the leadership of the Castro military had been greatly depleted by purges and losses in adventures overseas, and very few including warplane pilots had experience fighting a conventional war. The actual battle action was confused and very bloody, with the Cuban leadership sacrificing large numbers of troops to hold and then take ground. Much is missing for instance the losses during the sinking of the Baire are only represented by photographs from US sources, and a few propaganda articles such as that of Norberto Fuentes. As to Herbolt he was there according to Cuban government and left wing South African sources, the presence of his ship can be verified from right of center South African sources all of which I provided, which is somewhat more than one can say for the Che Guevara who was on a wild goose chase in Pinar del Rio Province. As to verifiable reliable sources there is no such animal when dealing with Castro era Cuba, because of Cuban government secrecy, and its massive propaganda-disinformation programs, the best that one can do as is the usual Wikipedia approach is provide a series of citations from as many sources as possible. The espionage aspects of whole circumstance, which were important if not crucial, have as yet not been covered; for instance the influence of William Wieland (Arturo Montenegro, apparently a Soviet Agent since at least 1933) in discouraging a wider US response has not been fully published. Thus it seems best advised to add data for instance today I am adding some material on Victor Dreke, a communist, as published by Pathfinder a marxist publication housein the US. El Jigue208.65.188.149 13:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Your comments above appear to express a strong POV. You must expect your actions to be scrutinised, such as removing the POV tag from the article.

Ciutat de Miguel, perhaps you have misread my comments. I do not suggest removing his name altogether. I suggest that he is already cited in the first sentence of the "Advisors" section. You have added two sentences - a list of aliases, an undated foot wound - what do these have to do with Bay of Pigs? They seem to only lengthen and confuse the article.

Herboldt. Was he actually at the Bay of Pigs? What part did he play? Why is this notable for inclusion? I don't dispute that his ship was at Cuba, nor that he disembarked from it. I ask what source places him at the battle. Franamax 17:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The Castro government has been in power for almost fifty years now, and waiting for impartial histories may take at least another generation. Thus this page must by necessity rely on various sources with different political nuances, thus it is proper to use as many of these as possible. Different Ciutat de Miguel alias appear in different reports, it is common to find him referred to as "Angelito" during the "War Against the Bandits," we certainly do not know enough about him, such as his actions as an officer in the Spanish Army, in the Soviet Forces and in Cuba. Herbolt apparently was significant enough to the Cuban government that it supported a film on his life. He certainly did not have much time for fighting since he enrolled in rebel ranks in (December) 1958, his actions during the Bay of Pigs are generally said to have been as quartermaster, an important but non-combat role, later he is said to have fought in Angola, and later became a museum director. Even if this film is merely Cuban government propaganda that should still make him a person of interest for this page. I do not understand why my comments show POV if Guevara was really not there and Ciutat de Miguel was, this information seems to offer an important correction. It is wise to recall that Guevara was beginning to distance himself from Castro at that time and may have been already viewed as unreliable. Wieland is cited in many sources from 1933 on: as reporting from Bogota in 1948 with no mention of Fidel Castro {since Castro is reported to be leading mobs at this time, either Castro was not an important actor in these events or his participation was neglected by in Wieland's state Department Reports. Wieland as did many others including Dame Margot Fontayn who had strong links to British intelligence services, supported arms embargoes against Batista in 1959. Wieland was a principal specialist advocating limiting air strikes during the Bay of Pigs Invasion, he apparently was investigated, but never officially found guilty of anything, however he was let go soon after the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Thus Wieland has a place in this article. Will forward some citations later... I am sorry that many of these references, except of course U.S. and British sources. will be in Spanish but that is the language of Cuba and other data appear to be absent. El Jigue208.65.188.149 02:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

When I mention POV I refer to "capitulate to Cuban government propaganda." I am most definitely NOT an expert on this subject, you most definitely ARE (or you are very good at faking it but I doubt that.) My only interest is to be sure that this article is worthy of an encyclopedia. The only way I can do that is to look with a critical eye at what is there - if the article is about Bay of Pigs then every sentence should be relevant to Bay of Pigs and notable in some way, those are my only concerns at the moment. Therefore I would hope that you would address all the points I have raised rather than some. I have great respect for your scholarship here, just please take each and all of my points, blow them all off the face of the Earth, I will truly be happy and satisfied that this is a good article. I don't really want to keep coming back to this, but I HAVE to, because it is Wikipedia. Franamax 09:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Franamax. Thank you for your kind words. I removed the tag because it had been there a while with little detailed supporting evidence for these charges. Notice I did not remove Ernesto Guevara from the leaders box, hoping that somebody could substantiate it. And yet, it seems appropriate to point out his presence in Pinar del Rio province somewhere in the text, and remove his name from the leaders box. As to pertinence Wieland was very influential on US Policy before, at the time of, and after the Bay of Pigs. It is common to judge him, as I do, as a possible mole since he constantly promoted measures that helped Castro, but that is not proof; and yet in these matters one rarely gets proof. As to Herboldt, see discussion on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:208.65.188.149&diff=cur Still need to add much here, e.g. the sinking of the Baire, and will do as my time allows. As to sources given the control of the media and archives in Cuba, one is forced to rely on sources of different levels of reliability for descriptions of Cuban government actions and Cuban government order of battle, for do otherwise is to submit to Cuban government control El Jigue208.65.188.149 22:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Cuban government order of battle

The description of the Cuban government's order of battle (battle commands) is generally not clear with many given credit for command. While reconstructing an "order of battle" is difficult with the Cuban forces at this time, one should certainly mention Efigenio Amejeiras and his brave, if intoxicated; police charge. Unfortunately for the historic record Efigenio Amejeiras was later linked to misbehavior and thus is not highlighted in many Cuban government reports. And yet if one is to list the "old rebels" at the Bay of Pigs certainly Efigenio Amejeiras's name should have a higher profile than that of Guevara. Ditto for the second Rafael del Pino. BTW Guevara was not charged with command of the Cuban forces that position was held by Juan Almeida El Jigue208.65.188.149 02:29, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

A summary of data has been placed in this section, please add sources as you find them. However, until this matter is clarified which may take a good number of years more, it is wise to understand that there are competing credits "Victory has a thousand authors, defeat few." Therefore it may be more productive to add citations to individual credits, rather than remove conflicting claims. El Jigue208.65.188.149 18:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)