[TexConfederate1861]

Some differences:

1. Gitmo is not in the middle of Havana Harbor.
2. Gitmo was leased by agreement from the Cuban Government.
3. Since secession was legitimate, the failure of the US Government to recognize or treat with the Commissioners of the C.S.A. was a slap in the face as well. So who is to blame? The Confederacy truly wanted to leave in peace.

But..I digress...the fact is, to make this argument even halfway workable, one has to believe in the right of secession. You don't, and because of that, I cannot even come close to convincing you. All of the actions of the Confederacy were based on that right.

[Non-Sequitur]

1. Gitmo is not in the middle of Havana Harbor.

And Sumter did not sit in the middle of Richmond harbor. Sumter sat in Charleston harbor, the third busiest port in the south and Guantanamo Bay Naval base sits astride the entrance to the harbor of Guantanamo City, one of the busiest ports in Cuba. The situation is similar.

. Gitmo was leased by agreement from the Cuban Government.

And Sumter was built on land deeded to the government by the South Carolina legislature. When Castro took over the government he repudiated the treaty. When Davis took over the government you seem to claim that he repudiated the agreement, although none of y'all have been able to point to a single piece of legislation that explicitly did that. Once again, the situations are similar.

Since secession was legitimate...

The legitimacy of the Castro government far exceeds the legitimacy of the Davis regime, since Castro won and virtually every nation in the world recognizes his government. Davis, on the other hand, was recognized by nobody.

But..I digress...

Yes, you do. So let's return to the original question and answer why you would cheer the firing on Sumter but would have a problem with bombarding Gitmo since the situations are, by your definition, almost identical - U.S. base in a foreign territory that doesn't want them there.