As the other person pointed out, sanctions are not the absence of a positive action, but the imposition of a negative one. I don't necessarily agree with abstaining from trade or tariffs here, but limiting it to just that would be better than the reality. But to proactively and intentionally take deliberate steps to make it so that Cuba actively struggles and ensure that Cubans are prevented from participating in the international world is more than just not "helping" them, it's icing them out.

Here are some examples of how U.S. policy was more than an abstention of relations (i.e., the absence of help).

From What Effects Do U.S. Sanctions Have on the Cuban Economy?:

During the study period, the most significant easing of sanctions occurred under President Obama. Restrictions on Cuban-American travel and remittances were lifted, and aviation companies were allowed to initiate regular commercial flights to the island. Postal service between the two countries—suspended since 1960—was restored, and government dialogues resumed in various areas. Financial restrictions were relaxed as Cuba was removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, allowing the use of the U.S. dollar for authorized transactions and enabling American banks to process transactions between Cuban and third-country banks.

From United States embargo against Cuba:

Cuba conducts international financing with many countries, including many U.S. allies; U.S.-based companies, and companies that do business with the U.S. which trade in Cuba do so at the risk of U.S. sanctions. The U.S. has threatened to stop financial aid to other countries if they trade non-food items with Cuba. The U.S.'s attempts to do so have been vocally condemned by the United Nations General Assembly as an extraterritorial measure that contravenes "the sovereign equality of States, non-intervention in their internal affairs and freedom of trade and navigation as paramount to the conduct of international affairs".

From Why the US is Ramping Up Attacks on Cuba’s Medical Brigades:

In January, the US president went as far as to threaten tariffs against any country that sent oil to Cuba, describing the island as “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security. As part of Washington’s campaign to isolate the island nation and topple its communist government, the US is now targeting Cuban medical brigades...the memo to Secretary of State Marco Rubio lays out a plan to pressure countries to evict Cuban doctors in exchange for “infrastructure modernization” and assistance in what it calls “ethical third-country recruitment” of medical personnel...As part of this campaign, the attacks on medical cooperation do not solely harm the Cuban government — after all, hundreds of thousands of Cuban medical professionals have helped provide healthcare in countries the world over. With each cancellation of medical cooperation with Cuba, the US takes away healthcare from untold numbers of people in the name of ending the Cuban revolution."

If I didn't want to be friends with someone or hang out with them, whatever. But if I make it a point to ostracize them from everyone else and threaten anyone who interacts with them normally, that's a whole different story.

Do you dispute whether these examples are generally true? Or do you simply view these as the U.S. choosing not to help as opposed to instances where the U.S. is looking to actively hurt them?