Preparation for the War of the Entire People. Remember that we are talking about Cuba, about Cubans, about those who contributed to the liberation of southern Africa, about those who fell some 90 days ago in Caracas.

As with any other conflict these days, the progress of an invasion against the Island, in the parallel universe of social media, has a greater dimension of what could be verified or observed in reality. In practice, there is already a kind of US invasion, version 2.0.

This dynamic should not be underestimated, even if it plays out on the digital stage. This is precisely part of the overall aggression, a first step, aimed at generating some kind of political empathy for the aggressor among the American population and, in parallel, subjecting Cubans to low-cost blackmail, whom they hope to intimidate, in order to facilitate the actions of the invading forces.

In this context, at least so far in April, several US digital media outlets have reported on the Pentagon's directive to organize some form of military aggression. These include USA Today and a site called Zeteo. CBS News, Axios, and the "expert" military platform Military.com have also reported on the news.

These media outlets have different target audiences. For example, USA Today is followed without ideological bias, giving it that veneer of neutrality/objectivity they boast about. However, Zeteo is followed by people who identify as progressives, which makes their willingness to blackmail Cuba even more intriguing, revealing that the progressive message is pure American rhetoric, if you understand the concept. CBS News, with its own nuances, also publishes for this segment.

As for Axios and Military.com, they are nothing more than platforms connected to the Pentagon (in the case of Axios) and, more generally, to the White House. Axios, while undeniably skillful, strives to project an image of "neutral experts," and this isn't the first time they've published breaking news about Cuba, only to have it quickly refuted; in other words, pure theories designed to mislead and manipulate those who rely on them for their information.

In general, what has been published so far speculates on what the aggression would entail, although they clarify that the type of action is not yet defined; significantly, it seems the matter is in the evaluation phase, developing aggressive variations, proposing options, not yet deciding on any concrete plan.

Amid these anti-Cuban media efforts, those directly involved, and especially the South Florida media, such as the infamous Miami Herald, specializing in fabricating falsehoods against the Cuban nation, could not be absent. Of course, there are the echo chambers of the counterrevolutionary cluster, but it's not worth scrutinizing them, because there are more serious matters to address.

The Miami Herald recently published a poll on the "opinion of Cuban exiles" regarding whether or not their country of origin should be invaded. The question itself is absurd and cruel, typical of these people. Yes, because who could possibly imagine that a national of any country, living elsewhere, would want the place where they were born, raised, and where, in the vast majority of cases, their families still live, to be destroyed? You must have a very sick, clouded, and frankly schizophrenic mind to think that.

Let's look at the survey. It turns out the sample consists of 800 people, with an average age of 50, all concentrated in four counties in South Florida. This allows the pollsters to project an image of representativeness, given the concentration of Cuban-born individuals in that specific area of the United States.

A majority agree with the infamous question, responding that yes, Cuba should be invaded as soon as possible, according to the respondents, totaling 79%. Even more ludicrous is that within that percentage, 38% say yes but no, that they should invade but only for humanitarian reasons—whatever that entails, straight out of the surreal. A respectable 19% rejected the idea or preferred not to answer, which could well be considered a kind of rejection to the question itself.

These numbers give rise to many considerations, both because of the age of those involved, but above all, because of where they live. As is well known, a kind of microclimate of terror prevails in these areas, where there’s anything but freedom of expression, let alone freedom of the press; here, character assassination, Sicilian-style mafia blackmail, and more recently, the threat of deportation, run rampant if one is not aligned with the local mafia and with President Trump.

In short, the study is useless; it doesn't reveal what the more than 2.5 million Cubans who are said to live in the US feel and think. In any case, its only use is to verify that the warmongering propaganda is in its prime, seeking to justify and, in general, pressure the White House to finally do what the neo-Batistas have been demanding since 1959, an adventure in which none of those involved in these efforts have the guts down-under to participate.

But beyond this media ecosystem, it’s necessary to examine, at least from a political standpoint, the viability of a military action against the Island of Dignity succeeding, based on the US reality.

This assessment is immediately hampered by the difficulty of understanding the Trump administration's own situation, chaotic in terms of communication and, it seems, organizationally. This contributes to the fact that anything could be concluded from a rational, logical perspective, but the doubt always remains as to whether these attributes, such as rationality, predominate in the White House's decision-making.

However, making an abstraction—a reckless one, it’s true—one can estimate that, from a political point of view, the Trump administration is already complicated enough without embarking on another military adventure right now, no less than a mere 90 miles from its territory, something that at first glance might seem like an advantage but, in reality, in these times of asymmetric warfare, is quite the opposite. This is an aspect well worth exploring further, but there will be time for that later, of course, depending on the circumstances.

Influencing this situation, for example, is the clear rejection by the American public, in general, of any war. They are quite fed up with the adventure in West Asia, and particularly with the conflict against Cuba. Between 61% and 53% are against it, in stark contrast to what was published by The Miami Herald. Of course, pressure from Florida, due to its electoral component, which is often exaggerated, is an important factor for Trump, but it’s wisely recommended that he not ignore the rest of the country.

The inventory of these complications has been frequently published here; for instance, the stagnation of the invasion of Iran, which at this point can be described as a major defeat for imperialism in West Asia, a massive Bay of Pigs invasion, on the occasion of the 65th anniversary of that other defeat, the first in Our America.

The antipathy toward the government, and especially toward Trump, is undeniable, as evidenced by the plummeting popularity, which now fluctuates around 30-33%. This is due, among other reasons, to the aforementioned defeat in Iran, but also to the collateral damage it has caused to the domestic economy, affecting a significant majority of the American population.

The White House has had to resort to everything to deal with this situation, which it created itself. An international energy crisis, conflicts with allies, even with the Pope and Catholics—truly for the sake of it, but hey, we're talking about Trump—NATO on the verge of collapse due to inventory problems and internal disunity, also with the cheerful cooperation of the US president; and a systemic crumbling of imperial hegemony in general.

And if the above weren't enough, there's also the dismantling of the cabinet, piece by piece, at every turn. The Secretary of Security is out, the Secretary of the Navy is out, more than a dozen generals from the top military command are also out, the head of the counterterrorism office resigns, and other less visible officials are also being dismissed. Even the CIA is caught, by chance, in an illegal covert operation in Chihuahua, Mexico, provoking an angry reaction from the Mexican government. Why is nothing going right for them? That's the inevitable question.

In short, the war in Iran is ironically fueling a kind of "regime change," but in Washington, at least in its early stages, driven by inflation and, especially, frustration within the MAGA party, and consequently, the electoral debacle experienced by the Republican administration. This trend could manifest itself catastrophically for Trump next November.

Another crucial issue that must be considered before initiating any war is the arms deficit, especially regarding the weapons that, until recently, guaranteed a certain aura of air supremacy for the U.S. military.

Numerous data have been published pointing to excessive spending on various missiles and drones, both for U.S. support of Ukraine and for their use in the aggression against Iran and the subsequent defense of Israel. These indicators could be confirming a long-standing thesis that the U.S. has long been unable to manage multiple war fronts simultaneously.

Regarding Cuba specifically, some believe the context is ideal for the enemies of the Cuban people. This is primarily due to non-military aggression, most notably the economic blockade and its current reinforcement in the form of an energy embargo, designed to exhaust the Cuban people, forcing them to surrender through hunger and frustration, disregarding their proverbial resilience.

In addition to this will to resist, the aforementioned intensification of the blockade, paradoxically... This has undoubtedly contributed to a better understanding among the Cuban population of who is primarily responsible for their hardships: the U.S. government.

Also, and last but not least, there’s what can now be categorized as a failure of the U.S. in its attempt to legitimize its aggression toward Cuba internationally, adding to the already existing problem of confrontation as a hallmark of its foreign policy.

The threatening rhetoric and the cruelty of the energy blockade have generated an increase in global solidarity and support for Cuba. There’s a veritable avalanche of statements from heads of state and government in favor of preventing the ever-present threat of Cuba's isolation, a condition, as is well known, that is essential for any military adventure to gain even a modicum of international acceptance. This is further bolstered by the material cooperation of various nations and social organizations, as well as the United Nations system. Like a boomerang, it is the U.S. that is emerging isolated.

To reach any conclusion about the current situation, it’s necessary to anticipate the worst and prepare for it. The threat is there, and figures like Mr. Rubio or the unstable Trump are in a position to do anything. We also remind both of them, and the owners of The Miami Herald, that we are talking about Cuba, about Cubans, about those who contributed to the liberation of southern Africa, about those who fell some 90 days ago in Caracas. End of statement.

Translated by Amilkal Labañino / CubaSí Translation Staff