(i)If you continued reading my OP I do reference the fact that the revolutionaries themselves did want the trial. In fact the section on how historical memory influenced the trials of the Cuban revolution I explicitly speak about how Che Guevara himself did want the trials precisely to prevent a Guatemala like situation from happening. But here is something that you are not contending with in your response

1. Fidel Castro explicitly in the Cuban revolutionary war made a holding those from the Batista era accountable as one of his promises when getting into power. So those trials in that context aren't a surprise
2. You say that its a misleading narrative to say there was public pressure on the revolutionaries. No it isn't. The revolutionaries promised that they would bring trials for those a part of the Batista regime. But as the evidence I brought up demonstrated, there was debate as to whether there should be acquittals or prosecutions as well as whether life in prison vs capital punishment was a sufficient punishment. Now can you tell me precisely why it was that when Castro would halt the trials of the revolution that he faced a backlash from the public? Why were there protests and even riots in provinces in Cuba when the punishments weren't sufficiently harsh enough? Why did Castro have to send his own commanders to calm those disturbances? Those are the factors you aren't considering.

(ii)You seem to have gone into my post history and are saying I am romanticising the Cuban revolution. I'll be straight up. I am someone who admires the achievements of the Cuban revolution when it comes to advances in health care, women's rights, land reform, the abolition of segregation, driving the Mafia out, as well as their contributions to things like Medical Internationalism and the struggle against Apartheid. So yeah......those are things to definitely admire.

At time if you actually read those posts carefully you would know that while admiring the achievements of Castro and Che, I also give criticisms of their autocratic policies. I criticise Marxist Leninism's one party ideology. I criticise the lack of freedom of press. I criticise the banning of freedom of assembly, and I also criticise Castro's role in the Cuban Missile Crisis. So that sense Castro and Che are no different from other historical revolutionaries who have major achievements and flaws. George Washington was a slave owner who codified slavery into America's laws. And yet he was a man achieved the building of a new nation and the founding of a democracy. Simon Bolivar, predecessor to Castro and Che, was an autocrat in his rule of Venezuela and set the stage for Latin American military juntas. And yet he had achievements in terms of liberating Latin America from Spanish Imperialism and abolishing slavery. I see Castro and Che as being no different in that historical light.

Lastly what I also do is in terms of pointing out the problems and flaws of the Cuban revolution I provide historical and social context as to what were the factors that drove them to those decisions, even if it's bad ones. So why did Fidel Castro place Missiles in Cuba, even though that was a terrible decision? Because of the threat of an American invasion. Why did Che Guevara support the banning of independent media in Cuba? Because of his experiences in Guatemala and the Cold War of U.S tactics of engaging in information warfare when organising coups. What I am doing here with the trials are no different.

(iii)Sure. Include discussions of Huber Matos and other dissidents. I have no problem with that.