Great list of references I say keep US Backed in the lede As to the main point not the language usage point I am actually amazed that we are having this discussion  I have never seen any reputable source that does not call him a US backed leader or words to that effect While it is true that the exact nature of Batistas relationship with the US was complex and varied over time all major sources inside the US inside Cuba and as far as I know through out the world describe him as being US Backed  from shortly after the coup in 1933 until shortly before his fall from power  The body of the article can and does detail the nuances of this relationship but the lead is meant to give a broad summary of the topic  Using US Backed is the best way to do this  As to Kaisershatners linguistic point to me US Backed military leader etc is shorter and more to the point that is military leader backed by the Untied States   

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
Great list of references I say keep US Backed in the lede As to the main point not the language usage point I am actually amazed that we are having this discussion  I have never seen any reputable source that does not call him a US backed leader or words to that effect While it is true that the exact nature of Batistas relationship with the US was complex and varied over time all major sources inside the US inside Cuba and as far as I know through out the world describe him as being US Backed  from shortly after the coup in 1933 until shortly before his fall from power  The body of the article can and does detail the nuances of this relationship but the lead is meant to give a broad summary of the topic  Using US Backed is the best way to do this  As to Kaisershatners linguistic point to me US Backed military leader etc is shorter and more to the point that is military leader backed by the Untied States   

