Obama shakes hands with Raul Castro at Mandela's memorial service

Aoxomoxoa said:
It is well beyond the time that the USA normalised relations with Cuba.
Click to expand...

The US will do that only after they re-conquer Cuba. Cuba was a whore house and gambling house for American gangsters, elites and politicians, before the Castro revolution took their country back. They are still sore at Castro for ruining their operations.

That's why the CIA AND the mob tried to take Castro out and failed. He then had to be demonized for them to legitimately re-conquer Cuba.
 
Taft2016 said:
Wait. Don't we have economic and political sanctions in place against Cuba?

Isn't this the equivalent of shaking hands with the white apartheidists who oppressed Mandela?
Click to expand...

Like there is any possible comparison between the two?

Should we embargo Saudi Arabia and China too, two regimes with far worse human rights records than Cuba? I'll see you in the unemployment line, if your doctrine is followed non-hypocritcally.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I am sure that behind the scenes it is still repressive but when I was there it seemed everybody was too busy making money. My son wants to go there next year with his girlfriend, she comes from Saigon.
Click to expand...

There's not mass murder going on. For the average person, life goes on, much like in China. It's not ideal, but let's not exaggerate the reality of the situation. The continuing lack of diplomatic relations and el bloqueo of Cuba in the modern age, 25 years after the end of the Cold War, becomes increasingly surreal and idiotic with time. The fact that it was ever blockaded at all, IMO, is stupid.
 
Also, let's not pretend that if Cuba had held elections in 1960, the United States wouldn't have rigged them. It's rigged the elections of numerous regimes in Latin America over the years to it's political benefit. The lack of democracy in Cuba is an act of self-defense imposed on the Cuban people by American interference and imperialism.
 
url


Bush can hold hands with King Abdullah, but Obama can't do a simple handshake, a common courtesy, with Raul Castro?
 
Prince of Destruction said:
Also, let's not pretend that if Cuba had held elections in 1960, the United States wouldn't have rigged them. It's rigged the elections of numerous regimes in Latin America over the years to it's political benefit. The lack of democracy in Cuba is an act of self-defense imposed on the Cuban people by American interference and imperialism.
Click to expand...

Hush, truth!
 
Prince of Destruction said:
url


Bush can hold hands with King Abdullah, but Obama can't do a simple handshake, a common courtesy, with Raul Castro?
Click to expand...

There should be more handshakes between those that traditionally haven't gotten along. It might go a lot further towards easing tensions and normalizing relations than all the 'diplomatic double talk' does.
 
Truth Detector said:
Why? You do realize that there is not an "embargo". It is only an "American" thing. Other nations are free to do all the trade and tourism they wish with Cuba. Why is it that WE are the reason Cuba suffers under a brutal repressive regime?

How about this; if the brutal repressive dictators step down, OR, the people of Cuba throw off the shackles of despotic dictators, THEN, we will lift OUR embargo and ensure normalized relations. We should even support a major uprising should it occur and assist in overthrowing this brutal dictatorship.

You cannot stand for freedom, and then make nice with brutal regimes. China is a singular exception for global political reasons.
Click to expand...

China, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia - there are plenty of countries more repressive than Cuba that aren't on our singular shitlist. Cuba was really the least bad of the Communist regimes, up there with Tito's Yugoslavia. You must realize that we are going to have to do diplomacy with regimes that do not share our cultural traditions and values, and not impose our ways on others through coercive means like embargoes, which artificially prevent our citizens from trading from theirs under penalty of law, and affront to freedom. Why do you seek to compel their people to rebel? Their people will rebel in their own time, under their own choosing. It is not America's right to force them to do so.

Really, America has the most prisoners in the world, 716 per capita vs. Cuba's 510 per capita. Cuba has also practically abolished the death penalty, having not executed anyone for the past 10 years, while the US remains a black stain on the American continents, brutally and sadistically killing 43 of it's own citizens in the last year alone, the only source of executions in that year for the entire western hemisphere. IMO, America is a more brutal and oppressive regime than Cuba. Let's worry about our own black human rights records, and not focus on the crimes of others.
 
Truth Detector said:
\

As for China, that was political to pit the former Soviet Communists against the Chinese Communists. A brilliant strategy by Nixon wouldn't you say.
Click to expand...

Surely it was a brilliant strategy. But I am not the one sitting on a high horse. I am not advocating an embargo on China, I am asking about your sanctimonious and hypocritical advocacy of an embargo on Cuba while not extending said policy to a regime that's worse morally.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I dare you to say that in Miami! LOL
Click to expand...

Cuban emigres are, by definition, people who had problems with the Cuban regime, and are disproportionately right wing and religious compared to the Cuban people at large. They cannot be taken as a representative sample, and it's sad to see them hold a stranglehold on US foreign policy just because they're located in a swing state.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Agreed...but tell that to the Cuban expats in Miami. They're the ones that keep this travesty going. They not only insist of the over throw of the current regime but also the right of return, meaning they want the property they lost back too. If Florida was like Texas or California, that is they predominantly voted for a particular party, the embargo probably would have ended by now.
Click to expand...

Funny, America doesn't seem to hung up about the Palestinian's right of return, and the return of their homes and lost property that the Israeli's stole from them and gave to Jewish families. America doesn't even acknowledge the right to compensation, much less a right to return. Apparently, when it is done for ideological reasons, it's bad, but when done simply because a person is of the wrong ethnicity, it's OK.
 
Truth Detector said:
Another amusing fabrication from the forums chief fabricator; how does a small Cuban community influence the entire Congress and Presidency?

What you type might hold true in local politics in Florida, but it does not hold sway in the entire nation.

Why should the US normalize relations with a brutal repressive Communist regime; because you and a cabal of leftist say so? I have yet to hear a coherent reason we should support and normalize trade with brutal repressive Communist regimes.

Cuba is a mess, not because of the US embargo, plenty of other nations trade with them, it is a mess thanks to a Marxist ideology similar to that in Venezuela that has historically been proven to be a massive economic failure and repressive towards human rights.

There is not one single logical, or coherent, reason to lift the America embargo until the dictators of this regime stand down and give the people their rights and country back.
Click to expand...

Venezuala is a democracy, it is unlike the regime in Cuba.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
You don't think that the Helms-Burton Act was vindictive?
Click to expand...

They had fun with the Helms-Burton Act in the Canadian legislature, one person proposed a law demanding back the property that America revolutionaries seized from Loyalists after the revolution, in a similar fashion to the way that the Helms-Burton Act does.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
You don't think that the Helms-Burton Act was vindictive?
Click to expand...

First you must comprehend what the definition of vindictive is:

vin·dic·tive [vin-dik-tiv] Show IPA
adjective

1. disposed or inclined to revenge; vengeful: a vindictive person.

2. proceeding from or showing a revengeful spirit: vindictive rumors.


Now please illustrate what revenge the US seeks?

It is hard to debate the uninformed and the clueless at an intelligent level.
 
Truth Detector said:
First you must comprehend what the definition of vindictive is:

vin·dic·tive [vin-dik-tiv] Show IPA
adjective

1. disposed or inclined to revenge; vengeful: a vindictive person.

2. proceeding from or showing a revengeful spirit: vindictive rumors.


Now please illustrate what revenge the US seeks?

It is hard to debate the uninformed and the clueless at an intelligent level.
Click to expand...

Now you know how I feel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top