US blockade of Cuba

[Wilber]

The embargo is wonderfully simple and vindictive, with a life of its own.

I agree, with the emphasis on vindictive.

Canada gets NAFTA....Cuba gets the finger. Some would claim that Cuba got the better deal.

I wouldn't, as much as it's opponents on both sides of the border complain about NAFTA, it benefits both countries.

[jbg]

They hypocrisy of some is astounding. There were many, when the US was preparing to invade Iraq, who argued for further "economic sanctions" or "smart sanctions" or whatever. Canada, whose breach of the sanctions to some extent makes it possible for Castro to keep sticking his thumb in the US's eyes, complains about the sanctions. Yet Canada fully supported the boycott of South Africa.

All very hard to figure out.

[myata]

Oh I see. Their real crime is that they "keep sticking their finger to the US". A big No-No. Just do what they tell and all kind of brutality (Pinochet, Saddam pre Kuwait, Taleban pre 9/11, etc) will be forgiven.

And sure, we should have kept apartheid in South Africa going (and maybe, by extension, segregation in the US proper - what's your take on that, jbg?). Now all is so clear, morally.

[White Doors]

Uh.. The US is not nor has blockaded Cuba. If they did, you couldn;t have gotten through to take that vacation.

They have an embargo on cuba which is quite different. You should learn abotu what it is you speak.

Did you protest when we had en embargo with South Africa?

[myata]

And maybe you should learn some basic grammar (in addition to brushing on your reading skill, that is).

[White Doors]

And maybe you should learn some basic grammar (in addition to brushing on your reading skill, that is).

I read the title of the thread. How did I get it wrong?

[myata]

Maybe you should have tried to read the rest of the thread too before sharing your valuable comments? Just a suggestion - feel free to use in the future.

[geoffrey]

A big No-No. Just do what they tell and all kind of brutality (Pinochet, Saddam pre Kuwait, Taleban pre 9/11, etc) will be forgiven.

Castro is a brutal dictator. He just doesn't have people beaten out in the tourist areas.

People always give the 'not as bad as' examples, but Castro is still a terrible person and his regime needs to end. I think that will come at his death.

I disagree with your Pinochet reference as him being worse than Castro, but we can discuss that on another thread if you so desire.

[myata]

but Castro is still a terrible person and his regime needs to end. I think that will come at his death.

And I have no problem with that. As long as its the people of Cuba, and not someone overseas decide when and on what conditions.

I disagree with your Pinochet reference as him being worse than Castro, but we can discuss that on another thread if you so desire.

Several thousand people confirmed dead, many brutally tortured to death. Thousands more disappeared without trace. That's Pinochet's record. If anything like that was happening in Cuba, this world would be filled to the stratosphere with US whizzing and whining of human rights abuse.

[White Doors]

Maybe you should have tried to read the rest of the thread too before sharing your valuable comments? Just a suggestion - feel free to use in the future.

Then perhaps you should not be so inaccurate in your thread titles in the future.

I am assuming that someone corrected you before I.

I take it that you have learned your lesson then.

[myata]

You needn't to "assume" - it's right there, in the second post of the thread. If only you cared (or could?) read.

[jbg]

Oh I see. Their real crime is that they "keep sticking their finger to the US". A big No-No. Just do what they tell and all kind of brutality (Pinochet, Saddam pre Kuwait, Taleban pre 9/11, etc) will be forgiven.

I can't believe you just gave me such a delicious target. Why should the US, the most powerful nation in the world, have to sit impotently and take abuse. Unlike some other countries, we pull more than our share of the weight in making the world a better and safer place. We may not be perfect, but are there enough Blue Berets to do what the US does? Who makes the peace the "peacekeepers" keep?

Is it Canadian Forces that provide the military presence in Europe to prevent revanchist tendencies from reigniting a millenium of wars that ended in 1945? Is it Canadian Forces that provide the military presence in Japan so they can be so, so peaceful, rather than a walking time bomb? Were France's proposed 700 troops going to keep order in Lebanon?

And sure, we should have kept apartheid in South Africa going (and maybe, by extension, segregation in the US proper - what's your take on that, jbg?). Now all is so clear, morally.

And what country, besides the US, even tries integration? My neighborhood holds, in addition to Jewish and Italian people, a few black families, Singaporean families, and others. All talk to each other, socialize with each other, do business together. Is that true in the multicultural paradises of France (with its carbeques) or Toronto?

We may not be doing perfectly but at least we try integration. Your talk of segregation in the US proper is rank, sickening hypocrisy.

[myata]

Why should the US, the most powerful nation in the world, have to sit impotently and take abuse.

Care to specify, which "abuse"? Abuse of not following the dictates which resulted in universal poverty and sell-off of country's resources to multinationals?

We may not be doing perfectly but at least we try integration. Your talk of segregation in the US proper is rank, sickening hypocrisy.

You must be having problems with short-term memory. Didn't you like bring it up that we shouldn't have used sanctions against the apartheid South Africa. If you have problems with sanctioning apartheid overseas it's only natural to extend that position back home.

[guyser]

My neighborhood holds, in addition to Jewish and Italian people, a few black families, Singaporean families, and others. All talk to each other, socialize with each other, do business together. Is that true in the multicultural paradises of France (with its carbeques) or Toronto?

Toronto yes , and I suspect it does too in France .

[Borg]

I cannot pretend being an expert on Cuba, but we did travel around a bit, to several villages, a city, on foot as well as in the car. Yes their houses look run down and in disrepair. But they do have houses. Yes cars are of 2-5 generations back. But buses are running (and people can take them). Yes their salaries are very low (~ 15 Can, general worker), but they do have jobs. And the kids generally look taken care of. Not eating garbage from the dumps. How can you say they want to exchange what they have for the life of perpetual poverty for the huge majority of population, like in the rest of South America? I can't, in all honesty. Maybe sticking in with their "prison state" (or whatever you want to call it) is their best bet, here and in this time?

Yup - it is a great place - so great people are dying to leave - literally.

Folks love to kick the U.S. in the ass, but Cuba can trade elsewhere.

When they do, the corrupt regime takes the money and runs. People in Cuba are not the happy and economically strong folks the touristas love to talk about. Instead all that money they leave behind simply finances that very same regime.

The U.S. does not prevent the economy from growing. There is nothing those folks can get from the U.S. that they cannot get from European or Canadian trade.

Any country that is willing to build a fence and / or kill and / or imprison the population simply for attempting to leave is a bad place over all. It amazes me that there are actually Canucks that cannot see this.

The Lib social re-engineering plans have succeeded.

Myata - I can assure you that you only saw what you were allowed to see. I am glad you think the citizens are well off doing what they are told to do rather than what they want to do.

Monkeys in a zoo are also fed and cared for as well. They also have a job entertaining the visitors. They also are provided rudimentary housing and medical care.

One day when you have experienced this from the point of knowing you cannot ever leave or change your lot in life - then and only then can you talk. You do speak now - with an arrogant and sickeningly patronizing attitude.

Ah yes - when you are finished with your 5 / 7/ 14 day vacation - then you give a regal wave and board your aircraft for home - leaving those well off islanders to their prison - not caring a whit for the fact that the vast majority of them could never do the same without fear for their family or their own life.

Perhaps yopu would have them eat cake?

There is little difference in the monkey and the islander - they are both imprisoned.

Think - just for once - think what it would be like if you could never leave your yard. If you are even capable of doing so.

Now sweetie - before you yell back at me - go look in the mirror and actually think about what you have written. And then place yourself in their boots.

Borg

[myata]

Welcome - however there's nothing new you said that wasn't already addressed in the thread. Sorry I can't waste my time repeating over and again for those slow to take in (or too important to read entire thread).

[guyser]

"When outsiders think of Cuba, it’s often the lack of political freedoms and economic power that comes to mind. Cubans who have chosen to stay on the island, however, are quick to point out the positives: safe streets, a rich and accessible cultural life, a leisurely lifestyle to enjoy with family and friends....For all its flaws, life in Castro’s Cuba has its comforts, and unknown alternatives are not automatically more attractive....Many foreigners consider it propaganda when Castro’s government enumerates its accomplishments, but many Cubans take pride in their free education system, high literacy rates and top-notch doctors. Ardent Castro supporters say life in the United States, in contrast, seems selfish, superficial, and — despite its riches — ultimately unsatisfying."

Vanessa Arrington, AP writer .

I dont think she agrees.

[myata]

Well, having talked to a "farmer" who makes ~12 bucks monthly, working six days a week with a family on his hands and who can't even own the animals he tends, I won't jump in to idealize the regime. Life may not be so bad for a government bureaucrat in Havane; I've little doubt that for most people it means poverty with no end.

The question is, whether Cuba (i.e., majority of its population) would have done any better if it followed the path of the other countries of South America (apparent answer being, "No", regardless of the amount of open or clandestine "assistance" and/or "influence" supplied by US) and whether that latter has any standing to dictate other countries what they should do. Because, as no credible reasons for imposing or continuation of embargo were given, one is bound to conclude that its' sole intent was/is to subjugate the non-behaving country to its will.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Because, as no credible reasons for imposing or continuation of embargo were given, one is bound to conclude that its' sole intent was/is to subjugate the non-behaving country to its will.

But a credible reason was given.....because the United States wants to (Cuban Democracy Act). The DPRK received similar treatment for over 40 years. Other nations do not have a right to US markets.

Canada gets NAFTA...Cuba gets the finger.

[myata]

Right. However, with that kind of argumentation ("because I can") it'll have real tough going trying to convince anyone in it its global universal and so on attachement to the values of justice, peace and whatever.

[bush_cheney2004]

Right. However, with that kind of argumentation ("because I can") it'll have real tough going trying to convince anyone in it its global universal and so on attachement to the values of justice, peace and whatever.

But the embargo is over 40 years old.....at which year do you think the US lost its "global universal" to Truth, Justice, and the American Way. If you want to champion Cuba's plight write a letter to Fidel asking him to hurry up and die already.

[myata]

I don't think it ever had it in the first place (the moral right to "guide" other people), but its post WWII policies, including most recent ones in Iraq/Iran, consistently show that it just isn't up to that task.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think it ever had it in the first place (the moral right to "guide" other people), but its post WWII policies, including most recent ones in Iraq/Iran, consistently show that it just isn't up to that task.

Correct.....America has no moral right...that is pure fantasy...same thing applies to Canada. There is no such thing as a moral right...ever. What America does have is raw geopolitical, economic, and military power.

I always find it interesting when US policies are held in low regard only "post WWII". This is either the absence of historical perspective of American foreign policy in the Americas, Asia, and Europe before WWII, or more likely the result of needing ugly American power to help fight the British Empire's (including Commonwealth) wars.

So we get "America good" as long as it was needed to maintain the existing status quo of imperialism, exploitation, domination, and subjugation.

[myata]

Well, post WWII is simply to signify certain reference point from which international politics was supposed to become more rational. I certainly agree that US is entitled to its geopolitical and so on interests. What is a bit discomforting, is the amount of goodness (i.e. liberty peace democracy and so on) talk what is being produced in it on subjects in virtually every corner and nook of this planet. The talk that can be in stark contrast with its actual policies, which are more often than not unilateral, selective and self-serving. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if it's only in the US itself that the talk would be noticed - or maybe it's mainly produced for internal consumption in the first place?

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, post WWII is simply to signify certain reference point from which international politics was supposed to become more rational. I certainly agree that US is entitled to its geopolitical and so on interests. What is a bit discomforting, is the amount of goodness (i.e. liberty peace democracy and so on) talk what is being produced in it on subjects in virtually every corner and nook of this planet. The talk that can be in stark contrast with its actual policies, which are more often than not unilateral, selective and self-serving. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if it's only in the US itself that the talk would be noticed - or maybe it's mainly produced for internal consumption in the first place?

But that's the point....such talk...."Liberty, Freedom, and Justice" have been slogans since day one (1776) when slave owners founded a nation that would grow to become the most powerful on the planet through war, conquest, discrimination, subjugation, genocide, and incarceration. Why anyone would choose to ignore the complete history of American foreign policy and such propaganda leads me to believe the untidy arrangements for their own days of empire would prove embarrassing and equally indefensible.

America is the same as it ever was.