Cuba

[Gail Simone]

Okay, I get that at one point, there were some semi-legitimate reasons to place embargoes and limit travel to Cuba.

But recently, I can't even find any Conservatives who seem to offer up a decent excuse for why Cuba has these restrictions, while other countries that are seemingly a bigger threat to the US, AND have exhibited greater animosity and human rights abuses, have remained on our trade list.

So what HAS the thinking been? I expect a lot of outrage at Obama's move here, but I'm not sure what the exact bullet points are.

Little help?

[jesse_custer]

Castro bad man. He not agree with everything we say.

[Pink Bat Maxine]

Okay, I get that at one point, there were some semi-legitimate reasons to place embargoes and limit travel to Cuba.

But recently, I can't even find any Conservatives who seem to offer up a decent excuse for why Cuba has these restrictions, while other countries that are seemingly a bigger threat to the US, AND have exhibited greater animosity and human rights abuses, have remained on our trade list.

So what HAS the thinking been? I expect a lot of outrage at Obama's move here, but I'm not sure what the exact bullet points are.

Little help?

I know the expatriate Cuban community has been big in this, but I also imagine that at some point, that will be generational, with newer generations less likely to see what the fuss is all about.

Now, time to sit back and wait for the first Cuba Gooding Jr. pic to pop up!

[bringthenoise]

Castro bad man. He not agree with everything we say.

Also, COMMUNIST! OOOOOH!

[KevinTBrown]

My guess is that it still stems from Bay of Pigs and the fear of a nuclear Cuba.

Russia has changed regimes since then, Cuba has not.

Other than that, I got nuttin'.



By the way, April 17th will mark the 48th anniversary of the invasion.

[West Mantooth]

Now, time to sit back and wait for the first Cuba Gooding Jr. pic to pop up!

That's what I was wondering. Why is Gail so obsessed with Cuba Gooding Jr.'s career?:biggrin:


The Cuban policy made sense out in a Cold War mentality but now, it's more of hurt feelings and the Cuban communities' rising political power able to keep it in place in hopes of mo

[Charles RB]

I'll go with hurt feelings and expatriate pressure (cos they = votes!), as well as just simple inertia - it's been blockaded for so long it's just the Way Things Are.

[Pink Bat Maxine]

I've heard that Special Education in Cuba is world class..... hopefully we can get an exchange of ideas going in a few areas.

[Red Jack]

Votes in Florida and the fear of seeming "unpatriotic" when running for office has created this idiocy.

It's stupid and makes our nation look incrementally more foolish every day it goes on.

[Nick Soapdish]

I don't really get it either.

We're deliberately trying to limit our influence and the influence of our culture on Cuba. If we were able to regularly travel there, we'd be having people boating down all the time (like the Bahamas) and Americans could see what life was like for Cubans and vice versa. Judging from other dictatorships, Castro would've fallen years ago if he wasn't able to make the US look like a boogeyman and minimize American culture seeping in.

Maybe we're afraid of Americans finding out about how awesome life is in Cuba and wanting to turn Communist. :biggrin:

[Joshua Pantalleresco]

Okay, I get that at one point, there were some semi-legitimate reasons to place embargoes and limit travel to Cuba.

But recently, I can't even find any Conservatives who seem to offer up a decent excuse for why Cuba has these restrictions, while other countries that are seemingly a bigger threat to the US, AND have exhibited greater animosity and human rights abuses, have remained on our trade list.

So what HAS the thinking been? I expect a lot of outrage at Obama's move here, but I'm not sure what the exact bullet points are.

Little help?

On a cynical note, it's a good place to segregate your black market deals. This I think, more than any other is why Cuba is still embargoed.

[Duxdoom]

Now, time to sit back and wait for the first Cuba Gooding Jr. pic to pop up!

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b362/Duxdoom/embargo.jpg

[MacQuarrie]

We could own Cuba in a year. All we need to do is the same thing we've done everywhere else: send in Starbucks and Abercrombie & Fitch. Smother the place in rampant consumerism and let communism become lip-service.

Kill 'em with kindness, and then we can get their cigars once again.

[Sean Walsh]

Because they killed Kennedy. Duh!

:wink: :tongue:

But seriously, it's a Communist regime, like, 200 miles off America's coast. America's never been thrilled by that.

And I don't like this provision about letting folks send money back there. From what I gathered, our economy kinda blows right now, so you'd think we would need all the money we can RIGHT HERE IN AMERICA. I fully admit I'm probably off in this regard, though, so feel free to correct me.

[Christopher Cross Is God]

Kill 'em with kindness, and then we can get their cigars once again.

You mean we will no longer have to disguise the cigars as "Mexican cigars" when going through customs?

They're just trying to limit Cuba's economy, both in terms of trade and tourism. It's all rather inane, though........Cuba hasn't been a threat for a while.

There are probably some who may worry that Cuba's government would encourage "the enemy" to take base in Cuba to prepare for attacks, and if easier access is made between Cuba & America, then it spells danger.......The problem with that logic is, even while the embargo is in place, "the enemy" could still do the same thing, except when coming into America they'd have to make a "connecting flight" to Mexico, so to speak, instead of coming straight through from Cuba.

[Infra-Man]

Castro bad man. He not agree with everything we say.

It's like a Meet the Press panel with these guys on it...

http://i373.photobucket.com/albums/oo172/hvigilla/SNL-MerryChristmas.jpg

90s SNL is where it's at. Fire bad.

[jesse_custer]

Yo. I prefer most 1990s SNL to any other era of the show.

[Infra-Man]

It's my favorite era (and the one I grew up with).

Thinking about it, if it were 90s SNL, it'd probably be a McLaughlin Group panel instead of Meet the Press.

[Typo Lad]

Yo. I prefer most 1990s SNL to any other era of the show.
Blasphemer.

YOUR TASTE IS QUESTIONABLE AT BEST!

[jesse_custer]

What can I say, the holy don't make me laugh, the funny do.

[Dreadstar]

I believe the reason the Cuban embargo has lasted so long is that after the Cold War was won, the following administrations just kept thinking they'd wait to lift the embargo until after Castro died. See, I think the reasoning was that we save face by dealing with the next regime instead of El Presidente for life. But the motherfucker just keeps going on and on, outliving the political grudge-match.

[Paul McEnery]

Now, time to sit back and wait for the first Cuba Gooding Jr. pic to pop up!

I know I can't wait to invade his bay of pigs.

[Slam_Bradley]

I believe the reason the Cuban embargo has lasted so long is that after the Cold War was won, the following administrations just kept thinking they'd wait to lift the embargo until after Castro died. See, I think the reasoning was that we save face by dealing with the next regime instead of El Presidente for life. But the motherfucker just keeps going on and on, outliving the political grudge-match.


I agree. It's very very difficult to sit down with a former enemy. Especially one who basically spit in your eye for 40 years as you tried every dirty trick in the book to get rid of him. And Raul isn't much better.

Personally, I blame the Washington Senators.


(Yeah...I know Snopes has debunked that one).

[Cam63]

Time to kiss and make up with them Commie bastards.

*Lights REAL Cuban cigar*

[KevinTBrown]

Time to kiss and make up with them Commie bastards.

*Lights REAL Cuban cigar*

*switches Cam's Cuban cigar with exploding cigar*

[Cam63]

*Eats cigar*

Fire in tha hole !

[Black Atom]

I'll go with hurt feelings and expatriate pressure (cos they = votes!), as well as just simple inertia - it's been blockaded for so long it's just the Way Things Are.

Yeah. I imagine most people don't even know there's an embargo with Cuba.

[Venom Melendez]

I believe the reason the Cuban embargo has lasted so long is that after the Cold War was won, the following administrations just kept thinking they'd wait to lift the embargo until after Castro died. See, I think the reasoning was that we save face by dealing with the next regime instead of El Presidente for life. But the motherfucker just keeps going on and on, outliving the political grudge-match.

Gotta give it to Castro . He has lived longer than most people thought he would.

[kingdom2000]

I never understood it either. If embargos had been applied consistently (USSR, China, N. Korea, rather long etc) then fine. But Cuba is the only one treated that way. The obvious reason why is economically the country is meaningless to the United States. I think that is the real reason it was never lifted. Every President can pretend to be tough on the enemy "look at the Cuba embargo" without having to deal with any consequences of such a decision. If the decision was suddenly about costing X million dollars and Y jobs that would look back in an election year that embargo would have been lifted in a hurry.

At this point its just a game of chest pounding while saying "me tough on bad guys!". Its all nonsense at this point in time.

[Corrina]

The reason the embargo has stayed so long is that the Cuban community has been largely in favor of it because the immigrants hate Castro and don't want anyone to have anything to do with him that's seen as capitulation. (And they hate Castro for good reason, I'm sure.)

And Presidential candidates want those votes, because Florida is a swing state (obviously) in Presidential elections. Hence, embargo stays, as most Presidential candidates court those essential votes.

I suspect Obama is opening this up, seeing how it tracks, and then, if it does, making more sweeping changes in the status of Cuban/American relations. But that's a guess.

[Ben Morgan]

This is a good article to check out regarding the Cuban embargo issue

http://www.freetrade.org/node/245

[mgs]

But seriously, it's a Communist regime, like, 200 miles off America's coast. America's never been thrilled by that.
Exactly. PLUS! Cuba used to be a former power, able to back up their craziness. Now, just b/c they don't have much military punch, their threat seems less, but that doesn't mean their government is any less crazy.

So, I think the way Cuba is hated by the U.S. gov is seen as:
1. it's Communist (differing policies, etc) ways are very close to us, geographically
2. tales of their continuing human right's abuses
3. their continued support and export of drugs into a country where there is a war on them.

[Paul McEnery]

Exactly. PLUS! Cuba used to be a former power, able to back up their craziness. Now, just b/c they don't have much military punch, their threat seems less, but that doesn't mean their government is any less crazy.

So, I think the way Cuba is hated by the U.S. gov is seen as:
1. it's Communist (differing policies, etc) ways are very close to us, geographically
2. tales of their continuing human right's abuses
3. their continued support and export of drugs into a country where there is a war on them.

Nope.

It's 'cause we treated Cuba as our whorehouse, and they kicked out all our pimps. And our powers that be were making money off those pimps, and getting their dicks waxed into the deal. So they were pretty damn pissed about it.

Everything else is gravy.

[kingdom2000]

Exactly. PLUS! Cuba used to be a former power, able to back up their craziness. Now, just b/c they don't have much military punch, their threat seems less, but that doesn't mean their government is any less crazy.

So, I think the way Cuba is hated by the U.S. gov is seen as:
1. it's Communist (differing policies, etc) ways are very close to us, geographically
2. tales of their continuing human right's abuses
3. their continued support and export of drugs into a country where there is a war on them.


Hmpf I could care less about a communist country being close by. Canada could become one. That is the choice of the people there and consider out beliefs regarding choice, I find it ironic how consistently we refuse to acknowledge choices that we don't agree with. If the people wanted to remove Castro, they would find a way as has occured throughout human history.

As for the excuses above (because that is what they are).
1. Why didn't we embargo USSR, China, N. Korea and so forth?
2. Why didn't we embargo the huge volume of countries that engaged in the same practices (including three above examples) in the last 50 years.
3. If that was the case, see any country from Mexico on down. Why are they not being embargoed?

The inconsistencies in application of policy should be a huge red flag that things are a bit off when it comes to policy regarding this country versus others. In a world were transporation makes geographic location mostly meaningless, being close buy isn't enough of a reason.

[Pink Bat Maxine]

I blame the Andrews Sisters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWY4_GyLufI).

[Darrell D.]

Nope.

It's 'cause we treated Cuba as our whorehouse, and they kicked out all our pimps. And our powers that be were making money off those pimps, and getting their dicks waxed into the deal. So they were pretty damn pissed about it.

Everything else is gravy.

Yep. There was no 'good old days' for Cuba when the (our) mob was running the casinos and the US was making a pretty penny from ventures such as United Fruit, and Uncle Batista was a ruthless bastard. People were literally starving in the streets, in the shadows of the huge resorts. When Castro took the country, and nationalized the casinos, well. He made enemies of both the CIA and the mob. A titanic team-up in the sensational Marvel fashion, true believer. They still couldn't kill him, but it certainly wasn't for lack of trying.

[mgs]

It's 'cause we treated Cuba as our whorehouse, and they kicked out all our pimps. And our powers that be were making money off those pimps, and getting their dicks waxed into the deal. So they were pretty damn pissed about it.
I have no idea what any of this means.


1. Why didn't we embargo USSR, China, N. Korea and so forth?
2. Why didn't we embargo the huge volume of countries that engaged in the same practices (including three above examples) in the last 50 years.
3. If that was the case, see any country from Mexico on down. Why are they not being embargoed?
1. USSR, impossible, halfway across the globe. Nuclear power. China, huge economic world power, owns practically half of the U.S. N.Korea, problem is that it still has sympathy from it's Southern relatives, also, it's right next to and hand-in-hand with it's neighbor, China. Plus, not many in the gov't could be planted as spies there, limiting understanding and initiative.

2. (see above)

3. Mexico is not close. It's right at the gates. Plus, it's not communist. I don't recall a time when Mexico ever threatened the U.S. with nuclear extinction.

[Michael P]

I have no idea what any of this means.
Then some reading of Cuban history is in order.

I recommend starting with the Spanish-American War.

[Arrogantcur]

I may be repeating something somebody said more eloquently in another part of this thread, but for me it comes down to this: if you want Cuba to be better about human rights or crack down on drugs, you have to use a carrot as well as a stick. Since the JFK days, I believe it has been nothing but stick, stick, stick, stick, and no carrot. All that does is make Castro (and indeed, some of the Cuban people as well) have a "fuck America" attitude, and that doesn't help America.

[Michael P]

Since Eisenhower, actually.

[Arrogantcur]

Since Eisenhower, actually.

Oh, ok. I thought it was JFK since I remember seeing a program about Kennedy once that included an anecdote of him telling somebody to stock up on Cuban cigars just before they were banned. (I forget whether he wanted the other person to get cigars for him, or whether he was just giving the other person advice.) I just figured that was the start of things going downhill, since the missile crisis happened during his administration as well.

[Michael P]

Well, the revolution happened late in Eisenhower's last term, 1959, so it started with him. Due to the length of time it takes for the government to do anything, though, all the really fun stuff did start with Kennedy (the assassination attempts, the whole Bay of Pigs thing, the big embargo, and so on).

The Cuban Missile Crisis was more Kruschev's fault than anyone else's, since he's the one who thought we either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care about a bunch of nukes being shipped into our closest offshore neighbor.

[Paul McEnery]

Well, the revolution happened late in Eisenhower's last term, 1959, so it started with him. Due to the length of time it takes for the government to do anything, though, all the really fun stuff did start with Kennedy (the assassination attempts, the whole Bay of Pigs thing, the big embargo, and so on).

The Cuban Missile Crisis was more Kruschev's fault than anyone else's, since he's the one who thought we either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care about a bunch of nukes being shipped into our closest offshore neighbor.

Or, maybe, just maybe, he wanted us to reconsider the bloody great ton of nukes we were stationing in Turkey.

[mgs]

I believe it has been nothing but stick, stick, stick, stick, and no carrot. All that does is make Castro (and indeed, some of the Cuban people as well) have a "fuck America" attitude, and that doesn't help America.
I dunno. Every Cuban person I've known, has had the 'fuck Cuba' attitude. I guess it reasons, since they live here, but...

[Corrina]

Well, the revolution happened late in Eisenhower's last term, 1959, so it started with him. Due to the length of time it takes for the government to do anything, though, all the really fun stuff did start with Kennedy (the assassination attempts, the whole Bay of Pigs thing, the big embargo, and so on).

The Cuban Missile Crisis was more Kruschev's fault than anyone else's, since he's the one who thought we either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care about a bunch of nukes being shipped into our closest offshore neighbor.

The Bay of Pigs was a holdover plan from the Eisenhower administration, though Kennedy fiddled with it and pulled the trigger.

[Adam C]

I have no idea what any of this means.

What Michael said. Since the Spanish American War, the United States had been interfering with Cuba's internal affairs to the point of violating its sovereignty. When Batista was in charge the U.S. was training his military and U.S. businessmen (and organised crime) enjoyed a close relationship with him. As odd it sounds, Cuban businessmen preferred Castro before he went Communist because he was more honest and they knew where they stood with him.

1. USSR, impossible, halfway across the globe. Nuclear power. China, huge economic world power, owns practically half of the U.S. N.Korea, problem is that it still has sympathy from it's Southern relatives, also, it's right next to and hand-in-hand with it's neighbor, China. Plus, not many in the gov't could be planted as spies there, limiting understanding and initiative.

Except that even before China was a huge economic power Richard Nixon opened up relations with it simply because he thought it might act as a counter-weight to Soviet power. And this was when it was under Mao Ze-Dong, a dictator comparable in brutality to Stalin that makes Fidel Castro look like Jimmy Carter. Never mind that Reagan's government channeled ample backing to the Khmer Rouge once it was out of power simply to use it as a cat's paw against Vietnam.

Though when you consider the number of countries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargoes) that the U.S. has sanctions against and how many of them aren't in the western hemisphere the distance argument regarding the USSR is meaningless. (And it does have sanctions against North Korea despite what other posters have argued, though this seems more due to the issue of North-South relations and the fact that the Korean war only ended with an armistice rather than a formal cessation of hostilities.)

2. (see above)

You should really do some reading on U.S. foreign policy in Latin America then. The United States government backed, and in some causes in aided in the establishment of, a host of brutal right-wing governments in Argentina, El Salvador, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, and Guatemala.

And in the last case, the CIA helped the military throw out a democratically elected President. And simply because said President was expropriating United Fruit Co. lands with compensation and re-distributing the plots to individual families so they could become self-reliant farmers. All with the stated intention of making Guatemala a modern country similar to Canada and the U.S. But he was branded a communist and thrown out in favour of a series of military dictators who terrorized the population with death squads and torture, culminating in the brutal rule of Efrain Rios Montt who took to wiping out entire villages. None of these governments really improved the lives of their citizens with the possible exception of the Pinochet government in terms of bolstering the Chilean economy. And even then it took successive civilian governments under the Christian Democrat and Socialist parties for Chileans to enjoy the fruits of this.

(And that's not even getting into the amount of aid the U.S. lavishes upon Egypt.)

3. Mexico is not close. It's right at the gates. Plus, it's not communist. I don't recall a time when Mexico ever threatened the U.S. with nuclear extinction.

All of which is pretty much irrelevant. After the Cuban missile crisis the country had no means of lobbing nukes at the U.S. and anyways Fidel Castro could only urge Krushchev to use the missiles, but the Soviets had ultimate control. Yet the Cuban missile crisis didn't stop Washington from following a policy of detente under Nixon or the thaw in relations under Gorbachev. All this means is that a potential ally in battling the drug trade is outside of the U.S. orbit and its not as though the Cuban government is supportive of the trade. Back in 1999 the Clinton administration (http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9910/25/cuba.drugs.01/) found no evidence of that senior levels of the Cuban government were involved in or complicit with the trade. In fact it has interdiction agreements with twenty four other countries.

Not that I'm sure what your point is. The drug trade has never been a reason given for the U.S. government for maintaining the embargo and its not as though Cuba is one of the major drug trafficking routes (http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/drug_trafficking.shtml) in the Carribean.

[Crowforge]

Cuban missile crisis. Really I think we've been mild considering our record.

[Adam C]

The Cuban Missile Crisis was more Kruschev's fault than anyone else's, since he's the one who thought we either wouldn't notice or wouldn't care about a bunch of nukes being shipped into our closest offshore neighbor.

What Krushchev actually thought was that the nukes would effectively deter U.S. military strikes on Cuba. Both he and Castro, partly as a consequence of Bay of Pigs, feared that a U.S. invasion of Cuba was imminent and had hoped that the nukes, unlike more conventional military personnel, would keep the U.S. from striking at all. His biggest mistake according to biographer William Taubman (who wrote the excellent Krushchev: the Man and His Era) was badly misjudging the American response and not thought things through, even just enough to plan contingencies. (Taubman does however suggest Kennedy shares some blame for pressing Krushchev to the wall during the Crisis despite the real risk of war.)

And while Paul oversimplifies by saying the missiles in Turkey were THE cause, Krushchev's memoirs show that this was also a consideration. The Soviet Union didn't have ICBMs that could stand up to the American arsenal and stated outright that the US "would learn just what it feels like to have enemy missiles pointing at you." (The quoted passage also has him mentioning how Russia has suffered three wars over the last century, invoking the good ole' fashioned Russian paranoia that goes beyond Leninism.)

[Adam C]

So, I think the way Cuba is hated by the U.S. gov is seen as:
1. it's Communist (differing policies, etc) ways are very close to us, geographically
2. tales of their continuing human right's abuses

Now I'm going to offer some points to consider based on recent developments in Cuba. Raul Castro has already begun loosening controls on the economy in hopes of fixing Cuba's dilapidated economy. So in all likelihood what we shall be seeing is the Cuban government following the path of China, liberalising the economy while maintaining political control, and potentially the human rights abuses that come with it. These decisions were made independent of the United States' actual diplomatic stance towards Cuba and in the past forty years the sanctions haven't really changed Havana's stance much.

As we've seen with Iran just rattling the sabre gives the regime more reason to tighten up, against its own populace no less. Crackdowns against the black market of satellite dishes and western products often coincided with worsening in U.S.-Iranian relations. Meanwhile Obama has managed to get a surprising amount of cooperation from Iran by actually using diplomacy. Why should the U.S. obstinately continue with a failed policy rather than reconsider how it could influence developments in Cuba positively? The embargo as it currently exists still badly affects Cuba due to the Helms Burton law which discourages foreign investors from even trading with Cuba. It's at least worth trying to hold out the option of gradually lifting sanctions on Cuba in exchange for incremental human rights reforms as part of nudging it on the path to liberalisation. It might not work, but as far as I know it has been tried. The U.S. simply stands apart and demands an unrealistic "all or nothing" deal. But that hasn't been working and I see no reason for it work even though the regime is now beginning reform.

[Nick Soapdish]

We could own Cuba in a year. All we need to do is the same thing we've done everywhere else: send in Starbucks and Abercrombie & Fitch. Smother the place in rampant consumerism and let communism become lip-service.

Kill 'em with kindness, and then we can get their cigars once again.

I agree entirely.

Isolating them from the world only helps prop Castro up. He gets to play the us-against-the-world card and doesn't have to worry much about troubling outside ideas filtering in.

For better or for worse, the US has a huge economic and cultural shadow and Cuba's proximity only makes them more susceptible. Except that we're actively working to minimize that as much as possible.

[berk]

View Post
We could own Cuba in a year. All we need to do is the same thing we've done everywhere else: send in Starbucks and Abercrombie & Fitch. Smother the place in rampant consumerism and let communism become lip-service.

Kill 'em with kindness, and then we can get their cigars once again.I agree entirely.

Isolating them from the world only helps prop Castro up. He gets to play the us-against-the-world card and doesn't have to worry much about troubling outside ideas filtering in.

For better or for worse, the US has a huge economic and cultural shadow and Cuba's proximity only makes them more susceptible. Except that we're actively working to minimize that as much as possible.Well, that's exactly what the US does want to do and what the Castro regime has been trying to prevent all these years, since they understand that Starbucks and MacDonalds and the rest of it is a large part of how post-British-Empire colonialism works. It will happen, probably within the lifetime of most of us here, but there'll be no kindness in this killing. Just the usual greed and quest for "full-spectrum domination."

[Crowforge]

Oh please spare me.

[mgs]

You should really do some reading on U.S. foreign policy in Latin America then. The United States government backed, and in some causes in aided in the establishment of, a host of brutal right-wing governments in Argentina, El Salvador, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
...........
(And that's not even getting into the amount of aid the U.S. lavishes upon Egypt.)
................
The drug trade has never been a reason given for the U.S. government for maintaining the embargo and its not as though Cuba is one of the major drug trafficking routes (http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/drug_trafficking.shtml) in the Carribean.
yeah, the U.S. has always done this, up to modern times with Middle eastern countries. But historically, it's been done by all countries with power, over those with less power. The way the US has acted is nothing new.

Re: Egypt, yeah, it's a back rub thing. it's been going on for years.

drugs are never the main thing, but all the reasons I gave add up and when made public, they get more support. who cares about routes, it's the origin (the heart) of things that matters.

[Cam63]

Then some reading of Cuban history is in order.

I recommend starting with the Spanish-American War.

Zorro started it.

[Adam C]

yeah, the U.S. has always done this, up to modern times with Middle eastern countries. But historically, it's been done by all countries with power, over those with less power. The way the US has acted is nothing new.


Well not quite. Most previous empires directly sent in troops, where the U.S. figured out you act through proxies and it'd be cheaper.

Still I'm not sure what your point is. The stated reasons for the U.S. government to continue the embargo are well known, but for the reasons I outlined are pointless and basically empty hypocrisy.

[Village Idiot]

But seriously, it's a Communist regime, like, 200 miles off America's coast. America's never been thrilled by that.

Yeah, and China is a Communist country, but we do big business with them every day. Plus China owns enough IOUs from the US to practically buy the country.

[Village Idiot]

Yeah. I imagine most people don't even know there's an embargo with Cuba.

I'd think most people don't know what an embargo is.

[Village Idiot]

Because they killed Kennedy. Duh!

:wink: :tongue:



I thought it was because they killed Bugsy Malone.

[Village Idiot]

That's what I was wondering. Why is Gail so obsessed with Cuba Gooding Jr.'s career?:biggrin:

You ever seen Cuba in spandex?

:eek:

[Venom Melendez]

Zorro started it.

Isn't Zorro mexican and not spanish?

[section 8]

You mean we will no longer have to disguise the cigars as "Mexican cigars" when going through customs?
.

No one would ever buy that, better pass them off as "Dominican"

[Charles RB]

Isn't Zorro mexican and not spanish?

Yeah, but he's secretly an agent-provocateur for Spain's Centro Nacional de Inteligencia.

[Briareos]

Also, COMMUNIST! OOOOOH!

He's also completely shut down the free press there and imprisioned or executed political opponents. He keep his people in abject poverty while enrinching himself treating them as little more then slaves.

[Dazzler]

Yeah.....

That whole incarceration, torture, murder, and exiling of gays, lesbians, and trannies makes me not really feel all that much sympathy for Cuba.

--Dazz

[Spackling Compound]

Yeah.....

That whole incarceration, torture, murder, and exiling of gays, lesbians, and trannies makes me not really feel all that much sympathy for Cuba.

--Dazz

Doesn't Cuba get a pass? What you just said is sort of the mantra of the right. On the rational side, we have Che and Castro's legacy of freedom fighting and liberating the souls of the oppressed.

The compassionate side with Cuba. Here's something worth a thousand words:
http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/gonzalaz.jpg

[Dazzler]

Doesn't Cuba get a pass? What you just said is sort of the mantra of the right. On the rational side, we have Che and Castro's legacy of freedom fighting and liberating the souls of the oppressed.

The compassionate side with Cuba. Here's something worth a thousand words:
http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/gonzalaz.jpg

Oh, yeah. There's nothing I love more than a bunch of douchey hipsters wearing consumer whore Che shirts, willfully ignorant of his rounding up and executions of homos and other undesirables. Not to mention Castro's gleaming record of inhumanities. The liberators of the oppressors just ended up oppressing the lowest people on the totem pole and it irks me when people paint them as the saviors of the underdog.

Cuba gets no pass with me.

--Dazz

[Spackling Compound]

Oh, yeah. There's nothing I love more than a bunch of douchey hipsters wearing consumer whore Che shirts, willfully ignorant of his rounding up and executions of homos and other undesirables. Not to mention Castro's gleaming record of inhumanities. The liberators of the oppressors just ended up oppressing the lowest people on the totem pole and it irks me when people paint them as the saviors of the underdog.

Cuba gets no pass with me.

--Dazz

I met a woman from Cuba who was recovering alcoholic. She said that she was bisexual and if she returned she'd be killed. Even her brother had turned away from her and vowed that he'd not support her if she came back.
The memory I have is that she made some negative comment about Castro after an AA meeting and some "hipsters" said that they couldn't understand why a bisexual person would be so "conservative".

[jesse_custer]

Too bad the issue here isn't whether Cuba gets a pass from you.

[Dazzler]

I met a woman from Cuba who was recovering alcoholic. She said that she was bisexual and if she returned she'd be killed. Even her brother had turned away from her and vowed that he'd not support her if she came back.
The memory I have is that she made some negative comment about Castro after an AA meeting and some "hipsters" said that they couldn't understand why a bisexual person would be so "conservative".
Go figure.

Those same people would probably be reviled to hear about gay people being rounded up and murdered, but have no problem making a hero out of a sociopath.

--Dazz

[Dazzler]

Too bad the issue here isn't whether Cuba gets a pass from you.

Hey, as long as you're comfortable being a great big, giant hypocrite, whatever floats your boat.


--Dazz

[Dreadstar]

If I were to be outraged over Castro's inhumane treatment of undesirables, I probably wouldn't limit myself to a subset of that group.

[Dazzler]

If I were to be outraged over Castro's inhumane treatment of undesirables, I probably wouldn't limit myself to a subset of that group.
What makes you think I'm limiting to myself to one subset of a group?

I mean, aside from the fact that it's a little more personal, yeah, I get a little more pissed. However, that doesn't mean that I don't think the way a LOT of people who were thought of as trash were treated exactly like that in pretty extreme ways was disgusting.

What's your point, other than to just throw some snark at an otherwise valid reason to not like Cuba?


--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

Hey, as long as you're comfortable being a great big, giant hypocrite, whatever floats your boat.


--Dazz

Apparently, you're comfortable with utilizing strawmen and ad hominem.

[Dreadstar]

The point being that there are many, many more undesirables on Castro's list than those you've listed?

I thought it was pretty self-explanatory.

[Dazzler]

Apparently, you're comfortable with utilizing strawmen and ad hominem.
Ah.

The internet buzzwords.

--Dazz

[Dazzler]

The point being that there are many, many more undesirables on Castro's list than those you've listed?

I thought it was pretty self-explanatory.

Yeah, and still doesn't seem to have a purpose.

--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

Ah.

The internet buzzwords.

--Dazz

Not buzzwords. You attacked me, and you also suggested I am a hypocrite when it comes to human rights, which doesn't represent my views (i.e., a strawman argument).

So maybe you should calm the fuck down and formulate a legitimate response.

[Dreadstar]

It doesn't seem to have a purpose because I'm not fueled by an agenda.

[Dazzler]

Not buzzwords. You attacked me, and you also suggested I am a hypocrite when it comes to human rights, which doesn't represent my views (i.e., a strawman argument).

So maybe you should calm the fuck down and formulate a legitimate response.

I am calm. I didn't suggest anything, I simply said it.

--Dazz

[Dazzler]

It doesn't seem to have a purpose because I'm not fueled by an agenda.

Well, I guess that makes sense, in a strange way.

--Dazz

[Lester C.]

Only Assyrians are going to get this joke but....

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c269/trigunfan1/BigBunsPita10.jpg

[jesse_custer]

I am calm. I didn't suggest anything, I simply said it.

--Dazz

In the future, it might be a good idea to have evidence before calling someone a hypocrite.

Otherwise, you just look really stupid.

[Dazzler]

In the future, it might be a good idea to have evidence before calling someone a hypocrite.

Otherwise, you just look really stupid.

Whatever you say, champ.

--Dazz

[Lina Darkstar]

Hey there, Dazz.

Not to add myself to the growing list of people who must be just worthlessly mouthing off at you, prompting an immediate punch to the 'Quote' button for a double-post rather than going to the effort of reading the thread before you respond, but.

Cuba's leadership should not get a pass from anybody for multiple human rights violations. Cuba itself consists of a large number of people who don't actually get a say in that leadership. This is the difference between a dictatorship and a democracy.

The embargo hurts the Cuban people and strengthens current Cuban leadership. Relaxing it will likely produce the opposite, desired, effect.

[Adam C]

I am calm. I didn't suggest anything, I simply said it.


And how exactly is he a hypocrite? I missed something here.

[Corrina]

In the future, it might be a good idea to have evidence before calling someone a hypocrite.

Otherwise, you just look really stupid.

In the future, it might be good to tone down the insults.

Otherwise moderators might get unhappy.

[Dazzler]

Hey there, Dazz.

Not to add myself to the growing list of people who must be just worthlessly mouthing off at you, prompting an immediate punch to the 'Quote' button for a double-post rather than going to the effort of reading the thread before you respond, but.

Cuba's leadership should not get a pass from anybody for multiple human rights violations. Cuba itself consists of a large number of people who don't actually get a say in that leadership. This is the difference between a dictatorship and a democracy.

The embargo hurts the Cuban people and strengthens current Cuban leadership. Relaxing it will likely produce the opposite, desired, effect.
Well, if it weren't for the knee-jerk reaction of bitchiness at the beginning, I'd tell you that I agree with you 100% about everything you posted.

I'm actually for lifting the embargo, but I feel the government should have to answer strenuously for the shit it's done to its people over the years.

If lifting the embargo would help the little people who get squashed along the way, then I'm all for it. That doesn't mean that everyone should pretend like some crazy stuff didn't go down.

--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

In the future, it might be good to tone down the insults.

Otherwise moderators might get unhappy.

Well, next time I'll act excited after someone attacks me first and accuses me of bullshit. Thanks for doing your job.

[Adam C]

That doesn't mean that everyone should pretend like some crazy stuff didn't go down.

And who on this thread pretend that the Cuban leadership hasn't committed serious human rights abuses? Because while I understand your anger at the Cuban communist party part of your anger seems generally directed at people in this thread, and it seems to be over positions no one has taken.

[Dazzler]

Well, next time I'll act excited after someone attacks me first and accuses me of bullshit. Thanks for doing your job.

Just chill out. I suppose next time *I* should act excited some random person acts like a dick to me FIRST?

Don't want shade thrown your way, stay in the light.

--Dazz

[Dazzler]

And who on this thread pretend that the Cuban leadership hasn't committed serious human rights abuses? Because while I understand your anger at the Cuban communist party part of your anger seems generally directed at people in this thread, and it seems to be over positions no one has taken.

I'm not angry. I'm not even miffed at the people in this thread.

--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

No, I pointed out that you were going off on a tangent. Your argument didn't address the original post coherently.

But I suppose I could have taken the high road and made up a position for you and attacked you for that.

[Dazzler]

No, I pointed out that you were going off on a tangent. Your argument didn't address the original post coherently.

But I suppose I could have taken the high road and made up a position for you and attacked you for that.

Okay, this should be dropped now.

--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

You think men should have the right to abort children by kicking pregnant women.

You bad, bad person!

[Dazzler]

You think men should have the right to abort children by kicking pregnant women.

You bad, bad person!

You zinged me. Now we're even.

And moving on.

--Dazz

[Lina Darkstar]

Protip. Dropping it, moving on, and trying to get the last word: one of these objectives is incompatible with the other two.

[Dazzler]

Protip. Dropping it, moving on, and trying to get the last word: one of these objectives is incompatible with the other two.

Well, you and I are just getting off on the wrong foot, aren't we?

We could try it over, if you'd like.

--Dazz

[jesse_custer]

Protip. Dropping it, moving on, and trying to get the last word: one of these objectives is incompatible with the other two.

What? How could you say that children should come sweep your chimney for no pay?

HOW COULD YOU

[Spackling Compound]

Maybe if the embargo ends, we can send the Che-wear back, too.

I mean...come on.

http://www.etsy.com/storque/media/article_images/baby_che.jpg

[SUPERECWFAN1]

With reports that Castro is near death and his brother is taking over , I doubt the nation will last much longer as it is. I can't see his brother holding the country togethor as well as his brother did for 50 years. And my prediction is... by 2015 that country will have a revolt.

Then maybe the citizens can make changes and get aid , and welcome US help. And the benefits it will have for the people there. If anything its the people who really need to force changes.

[Michael P]

I am calm. I didn't suggest anything, I simply said it.

--Dazz

And yet, he's banned, and you're still here.

Life's just one big ol' funny that way.

[Michael P]

In the future, it might be good to tone down the insults.

Otherwise moderators might get unhappy.

So "hypocrite" is not an insult now.

I'll remember that in the future.

[Crowforge]

So "hypocrite" is not an insult now.

I'll remember that in the future.
It isn't when you're actually being hypocritical. When it applies to me I just assert my right to be irrational.

[rick]

My, my, isn’t everyone in just a bit of a snit tonight.

I suggest that everyone go and have something nice to drink or something and chill out.

Now as for Cuba.

I am not in favor of keeping the embargo in effect and in fact think it wore out any use it had by the early 1970’s.

Let’s be clear though, Castro is a dick and his government is the classic example of the Latin American dictatorship.

Now here’s the part where most people are not going to agree about.

The people who are responsible for Castro and his corrupt government surviving for almost 50 years on the back of the Cuban people, are the Cuban people.

Repressive dictatorships only survive as long as their populations allow them to

[Crowforge]

I'm pretty mellow actually. We deal with a lot of people worse than cuba everyday.

[Samanthab]

I see it as pride. Let Cuba go, if they wanted to nuke US anyway they wudve done it a long time ago.

[rick]

I see it as pride. Let Cuba go, if they wanted to nuke US anyway they wudve done it a long time ago.

Be kind of hard to do without any nukes.

[Tobias March]

Be kind of hard to do without any nukes.

Yeah....I didn't want to say...

[Dazzler]

And yet, he's banned, and you're still here.

Life's just one big ol' funny that way.

Screw off. I had nothing to do with it.

As for the hypocrite thing, yeah, I stand by it. Look at jesse's first post in this thread: using "cave-man" speak to insinuate that Fidel Castro and Cuba's government as a whole are victims of American arrogance because Castro is some sort of innocent who dared to stand up to them. At the very least, for not agreeing with everything America says.

It's ludicrous to suggest that when anyone with a connection to the internet could look up and see what Castro does/did with anyone who dared defy his ideals. It's not am embargo, it's much worse.

Lift the embargo, whatever, but to try and paint Castro as a victim here is dead wrong and dare I say it?! Hypocritical. He's the victimizer to his own people, and if lifting the embargo helps them get out from under him, I'm all for it.

Now, I know the actual embargo going into effect had next to nothing to do with actual human rights issues, but we know more now and can use this opportunity to try and exact some change.

--Dazz

[Corrina]

FWIW, the banning didn't happen because jesse and Dazzler threw insults at each other. It's because jesse got snide with me.

And he's back today, anyway.

[Matt Algren]

FWIW, the banning didn't happen because jesse and Dazzler threw insults at each other. It's because jesse got snide with me.

And he's back today, anyway.
You're a hypocrite.

[Dreadstar]

*agrees with Matt*

[Tetsuo_man]

FWIW, the banning didn't happen because jesse and Dazzler threw insults at each other. It's because jesse got snide with me.

And he's back today, anyway.
You're a hypocrite.
*agrees with Matt*

Calling a mod a hypocrite:
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2241/facepalm2ic7copyrl2.jpg

[Typo Lad]

Oh just stop, all of you.

[Paul McEnery]

Oh just stop, all of you.

Seconded.
.

[Ray R.]

Blessed be the peacemakers.

[Slam_Bradley]

Blessed be the peacemakers.

http://www.legendsofamerica.com/photos-oldwest/1917ColtPeacemaker.jpg

In Colt we trust.

[Tetsuo_man]

Blessed be the peacemakers.

http://stlcomics.com/gallery/modern_reprints/peacemaker_2.jpg

[jesse_custer]

Screw off. I had nothing to do with it.

As for the hypocrite thing, yeah, I stand by it. Look at jesse's first post in this thread: using "cave-man" speak to insinuate that Fidel Castro and Cuba's government as a whole are victims of American arrogance because Castro is some sort of innocent who dared to stand up to them. At the very least, for not agreeing with everything America says.

It's ludicrous to suggest that when anyone with a connection to the internet could look up and see what Castro does/did with anyone who dared defy his ideals. It's not am embargo, it's much worse.

Lift the embargo, whatever, but to try and paint Castro as a victim here is dead wrong and dare I say it?! Hypocritical. He's the victimizer to his own people, and if lifting the embargo helps them get out from under him, I'm all for it.

Now, I know the actual embargo going into effect had next to nothing to do with actual human rights issues, but we know more now and can use this opportunity to try and exact some change.

--Dazz

It’s nice to get an explanation instead of a baseless attack.

Frankly, your interpretation is wrong. I used the caveman talk to mock two groups of people:

1. Those who believe that we should uphold the embargo just because we disagree with Castro.

2. Those who simply parrot negative talk about Castro.

Both groups of people do not address the political and economic consequences of the embargo with these arguments alone. Moreover, both groups would miss the point of Gail’s question about hypocrisy.

Pretty much everyone but you understood my point based on the posts in this thread. My post had Nothing to do with Victimization because I don’t get off on Whining about victims.

Commence baseless attacks if you wish. I clarified my position, so I’m done.