[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not held responcible for keeping them poor. [/quote]
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not invading it nor are they attempting to topple its government.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not held responcible for keeping them poor.
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not invading it nor are they attempting to topple its government.[/quote]
And yet people are still fleeing brokeass Cuba to America.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not held responcible for keeping them poor.
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not invading it nor are they attempting to topple its government.[/quote]
Then why is the country still poor? Your argument makes no sense. If there was a naval blockade around Cuba, I could see your point. There is not. Cuba is able to trade with others. Why is the country still poor?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not held responcible for keeping them poor.
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not invading it nor are they attempting to topple its government.[/quote]
Why was Cuba trying to overthrow the governments of several other South American countries and South Africa? Is Cuba responcible for making these countries poor since they are trying to topple their governments?
Well, anyways. I wonder what kind of retirement package oppresive commie dictators get.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not held responcible for keeping them poor.
Funny, the countries who DO trade with Cuba are not invading it nor are they attempting to topple its government.
Then why is the country still poor? Your argument makes no sense. If there was a naval blockade around Cuba, I could see your point. There is not. Cuba is able to trade with others. Why is the country still poor? [/quote]
You’d think as mighty as the EC is now, it could more than make up for any loss of business the US is causing Cuba.
Have you seen the cars they Drive over there? Nothing new since the “revolution”. If Europe really cared beyond lixy-like lip service, they would be driving BMW’s, or VW’s, or mini’s. But no - they are still driving shit.
Put up or shut up, lixy - at least the US has a reason we don’t trade with them.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Personally, I have no question about Castro. He’s an oppresive pinko dictator. But, again, why the embargo? I notice certain other countries we do a good amount of business with. Some as oppresive, if not more so. And some of those, much more dangerous. I’m not talking about selling Castro arms, either folks.
Why not try a different schtick? Why not let free markets do the work? [/quote]
Exactly. Funny that your common sense gets ignored in the interest of vitriolic back and forth on details. The Cuba embargo has got to be among the ten dumbest policies of our country (along with what’s left of the “Bush Doctrine,” the War on Drugs, maybe a couple more…).
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Personally, I have no question about Castro. He’s an oppresive pinko dictator. But, again, why the embargo? I notice certain other countries we do a good amount of business with. Some as oppresive, if not more so. And some of those, much more dangerous. I’m not talking about selling Castro arms, either folks.
Why not try a different schtick? Why not let free markets do the work?
Exactly. Funny that your common sense gets ignored in the interest of vitriolic back and forth on details. The Cuba embargo has got to be among the ten dumbest policies of our country (along with what’s left of the “Bush Doctrine,” the War on Drugs, maybe a couple more…).[/quote]
What does the US have to gain by trading with Cuba? Better cigars? The US is not compelled to trade with every country on the globe, is it?
[quote]rainjack wrote:
What does the US have to gain by trading with Cuba? Better cigars? The US is not compelled to trade with every country on the globe, is it? [/quote]
I did a quick lookaround over the past 50 years that Castro has been in power, and it turns out, America seems to have done just fine while not trading with Cuba.
Actions have consequences - and had we opened up trade with Castro, with the natural result being that Castro grew even fatter and richer from the trade relationship, the US would be blamed for contributing to keeping him in power.
It’s the same parlor game we have seen over and over. And it never gets any smarter.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Actions have consequences - and had we opened up trade with Castro, with the natural result being that Castro grew even fatter and richer from the trade relationship, the US would be blamed for contributing to keeping him in power.
It’s the same parlor game we have seen over and over. And it never gets any smarter.[/quote]
No, you idiot! There’s a world of difference between the US government handing out money (think Pinochet, Mubarak, Zionists, etc.) and not interfering with trade.
[quote]lixy wrote:
No, you idiot! There’s a world of difference between the US government handing out money (think Pinochet, Mubarak, Zionists, etc.) and not interfering with trade.[/quote]
Yawn - for someone so sensitive about insults, your tearful lashing out (!) is pretty funny.
And you will note - yet again - that I was responding to Rainjack’s point about a trade relationship specifically with Cuba, with Rainjack’s post being a response to GDollars.
I realize you aren’t very bright, are ideologically transparent, and crave respect you will never have, but learn to read better.
[quote]lixy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Actions have consequences - and had we opened up trade with Castro, with the natural result being that Castro grew even fatter and richer from the trade relationship, the US would be blamed for contributing to keeping him in power.
It’s the same parlor game we have seen over and over. And it never gets any smarter.
No, you idiot! There’s a world of difference between the US government handing out money (think Pinochet, Mubarak, Zionists, etc.) and not interfering with trade.[/quote]
Whose trade are we interfering with wrt Cuba?
fsck rrf
[quote]lixy wrote:
pat wrote:
…
Nowhere in your rant does the sovereignty of the Cuban people come into the equation. I stand by the assertion that Castro wouldn’t turned into that big an SOB if it weren’t for the Bay of Pigs and the repeated US attempts to put yet another puppet at the head of Cuba.
Imagine for a second what would have happened if Cuba had oil on tap Iraq-style.[/quote]
So according to your logic here. The U.S. can control the behavior of people by policy. That the actions others take are the responsibility of the U.S. and not there own will or volition. Ha!
The Bay of Pigs was a reaction to Castro’s ties with the USSR and the ceasing of American owned lands and businesses in Cuba. It was a failed attempt to remove him be cause Kennedy chickened out at the last minute.
[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
They just know not to bother with a totalitarian government in charge.
“Not to bother”? Do you realize kids are dying because of the embargo?
sooo we can’t police the world but you want us to rescue every starving person in the world?
So let me get this straight. We get involved and it’s our fault, we do nothing and it’s our fault. Got it, so it’s always our fault whenever something bad happens, why didn’t I think of that before?[/quote]
My hat is off to you, sir! What you describe is the essence of how the anti-America crowd thinks. We cannot win, because we’re Americans afterall.
We’re apparently supposed to help in secret, while the rest of the world spits at us. We should keep our goodness hidden because its an affront to all the tin pot dictators and sharia-maddened shitbags.
Cotton tried to assassinate Castro, too bad he didn’t.
[quote]lixy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Actions have consequences - and had we opened up trade with Castro, with the natural result being that Castro grew even fatter and richer from the trade relationship, the US would be blamed for contributing to keeping him in power.
It’s the same parlor game we have seen over and over. And it never gets any smarter.
No, you idiot! There’s a world of difference between the US government handing out money (think Pinochet, Mubarak, Zionists, etc.) and not interfering with trade.[/quote]
Long live Zionism! Long live Israel!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Cotton tried to assassinate Castro, too bad he didn’t.[/quote]
Lots of people tried to assassinate Castro he is as indestructible as Keith Richards. It’s still a worth cause.
[quote]pat wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Cotton tried to assassinate Castro, too bad he didn’t.
Lots of people tried to assassinate Castro he is as indestructible as Keith Richards. It’s still a worth cause.[/quote]
!
[quote]rainjack wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Personally, I have no question about Castro. He’s an oppresive pinko dictator. But, again, why the embargo? I notice certain other countries we do a good amount of business with. Some as oppresive, if not more so. And some of those, much more dangerous. I’m not talking about selling Castro arms, either folks.
Why not try a different schtick? Why not let free markets do the work?
Exactly. Funny that your common sense gets ignored in the interest of vitriolic back and forth on details. The Cuba embargo has got to be among the ten dumbest policies of our country (along with what’s left of the “Bush Doctrine,” the War on Drugs, maybe a couple more…).
What does the US have to gain by trading with Cuba? Better cigars? The US is not compelled to trade with every country on the globe, is it? [/quote]
No. But we trade with plenty of people who are as bad or worse, so the moral case doesn’t hold up too well. And as a practical matter, sanctions don’t really work. They tend to unite authoritarian regimes against an outside enemy, who can be blamed for all the country’s ills (see Saddam’s Iraq, North Korea, Cuba, etc.). Generally, free trade advances American interests and ideals far better than isolating rogue states.