Slashdot Mirror


Fidel Castro Resigns

Smordnys s'regrepsA writes "Fidel Castro, the leader of the island nation of Cuba has declined the possibility of keeping his seat as President, after the February 24th National Assembly election. "I neither will aspire to nor will I accept — I repeat — I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief," Castro wrote almost 19 months after a severe illness caused him to hand power temporarily to his brother Raul."

728 comments

  1. Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now maybe I can get good cigars legally.

    1. Re:Thank God by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But there aren't a lot of French people living in Florida or any other swing states.

    2. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Remind me again... why is the U.S. mad at them? France has pulled worse shitball stunts against you than Cuba has. They nationalized property without compensating international businesses. This earned them the initial embargo. Then they became Soviet puppets. This made it permanent. And when they refused to change when Carter dropped the embargo they lost the sympathy of future administrations that restored it. Various acts like supporting leftist guerrillas or shooting down Cessnas with MiGs continued to earn them international contempt.

      I'm not arguing for the embargo, but I just think it is wise not to paint Cuba as some super free haven that has the best health-care and education in the world. It is not as bad as the neo-cons paint it nor is it as good as the far left paints it. Hopefully Castro's resignation will spark a multi-party democracy.
    3. Re:Thank God by molarmass192 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Ohhhhh ... thats f-ing priceless ... please, enlighten us as to the "shitball stunts" that France has pulled against the US? You know, stuff that makes the Cuban Revolution, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs seem like silly jokes between two old friends.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    4. Re:Thank God by Frank+Battaglia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, the Bay of Pigs was really us (the U.S.) pulling a shitball stunt against them (Cuba), so it shouldn't really count in this comparison between what France has done and what Cuba has done.

    5. Re:Thank God by Guspaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "international contempt"? They're strong allies of Canada. The primary source of international contempt towards Cuba comes from the US. My guess (and it's just a guess) is that the world looks more favourably on Cuba than the US due to foreign policy. Gitmo doesn't help.

    6. Re:Thank God by comradeeroid · · Score: 2, Funny

      No no no... you don't understand. The bay of pigs made the US look bad, and thus it was wrong of Cuba to be involved. ;)

      --
      If you see a rock violating the law of gravity, then the law is wrong, not the rock!
    7. Re:Thank God by Saurian_Overlord · · Score: 1

      There was that minor ordeal with the Soviet nuclear missiles as well. Keep in mind that was, at least for most of the general public, the start of the tension and the questioning of Castro's policies.

    8. Re:Thank God by bob.appleyard · · Score: 1

      the Bay of Pigs

      Wasn't that when the USA tried to invade Cuba and got repelled? How was that Cuba doing something nasty to the USA? Was that a simple mistake, or am I totally wrong here?

      --
      How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
    9. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I grew up in South Florida. Hispanics have historically tended to be Democrats, but not in Florida. The very large, vocal Cuban community there is a very strong political force.

      In short, parent is not flamebait.

    10. Re:Thank God by vertinox · · Score: 4, Informative

      They nationalized property without compensating international businesses.

      Hey now. Batista and those international businesses (US mafia) were no saints. Most of those companies were run by the Mob and Batista took bribes all the time when it came to business practices while squandering the Cuban people's money he collected through taxes and the state lottery.

      Yeah, Castro was no saint either, but the amount of corruption and totalitarianism by Batista and his cohorts is almost the same. (Heck Batista overthrew elections several times).

      Had the US simply accepted Castro and opened relations with him as a legitimate government he would not have turned to the Soviets for aid. Remember... The world almost went nuclear over the fact we wouldn't just acknowledge that we could work together or at least stop Batista while we had a chance when he over threw the elections and installed a dictatorship.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    11. Re:Thank God by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Strong allies?" We're willing to engage in commerce with Cuba; that's a little different from treating them like a NATO member or something.

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    12. Re:Thank God by C10H14N2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They nationalized property without compensating international businesses.

      So did Mexico. So did Venezuela.

      Then they became Soviet puppets.

      Pretty much all of Europe east of Austria, a third of Latin America, half of Africa and most of Asia. We left the first reasonably well alone, but we fought direct wars all over the second and proxy wars everywhere else, but the worst we can muster with Cuba is, what, the Bay of Pigs? Hell, we killed Ghaddafi's daughter with a cruise missile and now we're toasting his health. What gives?

      Various acts like supporting leftist guerrillas or shooting down Cessnas with MiGs continued to earn them international contempt.

      We never removed diplomatic relations from Russia, we established it long ago and never rescinded it with China, even though we were fighting a half dozen proxy wars in Africa and Asia funded by both of them (think: Iran-Contra and the other war in Afghanistan, and a little tiff we call 'Vietnam' for starts), and we recently restored it with freakin' Libya--which is, from the American point of view at least, a terrorist sponsoring socialist dictatorship in the habit of not bringing down Cessnas, but, with Pan Am 103, like the Soviets with KAL007, bringing down 747s. But, then again, in their eyes, so are we, what with blasting Iranian Air 655 out of the sky, incinerating about 300 civilians in the process, for which we paid $60 million and refused to apologize. We milked Libya for $2 Billion and made them grovel in order get back on the party invite list.

      It is not as bad as the neo-cons paint it nor is it as good as the far left paints it.

      The "far left" is more in the habit of pointing out the cozy relationships neo-cons and democrats alike have been more than happy to have with regimes FAR more out of line than Cuba. I mean, honestly, the PRI, Pinochet and Noriega were best buddies but Castro was Satan incarnate? Are we kidding here? The point of it is we could AFFORD to isolate Cuba (or, say, Chile) for having dirty little socialist tendencies in order to make a shining example of our not allowing other forms of government in our hemisphere. When countries like Mexico or Venezuela pull the same thing, we wag our fingers in their general direction, shrug, and let the container ships and oil tankers roll into port on schedule. The "far left" looks at that and puzzles why it's A-Okay to blow your kids' college fund in Moscow, Beijing, Triploi, Tehran, Panama or Saigon--hell, you can lunch in Pyongyang with no trouble from the Feds and we're technically still at war with them--yet it's a crime worthy of imprisonment to smoke a stogie in Havana?

    13. Re:Thank God by Malevolent+Tester · · Score: 1

      Ohhhhh ... thats f-ing priceless ... please, enlighten us as to the "shitball stunts" that France has pulled against the US? You know, stuff that makes the Cuban Revolution, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs seem like silly jokes between two old friends. How dare these ignorant third worlders overthrow a puppet government and defend themselves against an invasion. Disgraceful. And having Soviet missiles on the island? Why, that's as bad as if there were nukes in Turkey and the UK. Wait....

      I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but governments are supposed to act in the interests of their own people, not the interests of America. That Castro was an incompetent, a Soviet stooge and a repressive, brutal dictator doesn't suddenly justify America's actions. Realpolitik or idealism, choose one.
      --
      If you haven't made a developer cry, you've wasted a day.
    14. Re:Thank God by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Remind me again... why is the U.S. mad at them? France has pulled worse shitball stunts against you than Cuba has.

      Well, agreeing to host Soviet missiles around 1960 would qualify as a seriously shitball stunt. Still, that was 40-some years ago. You want the real reason? It all started when Castro pissed off the mob who ran the casinos in Havana, who just happened to be Kennedy's buddies. Lately, there's a certain amount of face-saving that prevents normalization of relations with Castro, as well as the exceptionally strong agriculture lobby in the US which really doesn't want to see a flood of cheap rice on the US market.

      Nevermind France, how the shit have we gotten more friendly with *Qaddafi* in Libya? (replace with spelling of your choice).

    15. Re:Thank God by Tailsfan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Whatever. Just quit smoking before you get cancer.

    16. Re:Thank God by Thwomp · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, I've heard that American cigars have a tendency of exploding.

    17. Re:Thank God by Snocone · · Score: 1

      Well, um, Messr. Fidel was the only sitting head of state to attend Pierre Trudeau's funeral, you know.

      I'd say the "strong allies" impression counts as a fair cop.

    18. Re:Thank God by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      We're not really mad at them. It is about keeping cigar prices high. That isn't even the real Castro. He died in 1981. Read more!

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    19. Re:Thank God by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      When did France put nuclear missiles right off of our coast, aimed right at our cities?

      --
      How ya like dat?
    20. Re:Thank God by MrSteveSD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't, mistake official explanations with the real reasons. The US has being trying to control Cuba since the 1800s but the British Navy was an obstacle for a long time. John Quincy Adams noted that "the laws of political gravitation" would bring Cuba into the hands of the U.S.

      Eventually the US saw an opportunity when Cuba was striving for independence from Spain. The resistance in Cuba was wary of US offers of help because they were worried that once in, the US would never leave. However, the US gave assurances that would not be the case (e.g. Teller Amendment) and went in to help the resistance. Once the Spanish-controlled government was overthrown, the US (predictably) refused to leave. General Samuel B.M. Young expressed the opinion... "a lot of degenerates...no more capable of self-government than the savages of Africa,".

      Eventually US forces did leave, but they laid down conditions for withdrawal, known as the Platt Amendment. The Cubans had to agree to a US Naval Base (the now infamous Guantanamo Bay) and to never transfer any Cuban land to a power other than the US. The terms also allowed the US to intervene in Cuban affairs when the US deemed necessary. Under US pressure, the terms were even embedded into the Cuban constitution. Eventually this repressive and imperialistic amendment was repealed in 1934 under Roosevelt's "Good Neighbour policy" but the US refused to give up Guantanamo bay and it can only be removed with the consent of both parties (an unlikely occurrence to say the least). Of course, it was ok for the US to give up these powers in 1934 because Fulgencio Batista was already the de facto ruler of Cuba. With this US-backed dictator in place, the Platt Amendment wasn't really necessary.

      Eventually this nice little arrangement ended in 1959 when Castro toppled Batista. That is the source of US anger ever since. It is the anger of losing control of Cuba. All the rest of it is just excuses. It was the fear of invasion from the US (which was being planned) that drove Castro into an alliance with the USSR. Eventually there was an invasion attempt (bay of Pigs) but fortunately for Castro it was totally pathetic, possibly bordering on a US attempt at humour.

      Although there was no successful invasion, the US conducted a long terrorist campaign against Cuba including the destruction of crops and what we would regard today as Al Qaeda-style bombings. Right now the US is harbouring Possada Carriles who is widely believed to have been behind the bombing of a Cuban airliner in 1976 that killed 73 people. The US denies involvement in the bombing, but refuses to extradite him to Venezuela citing fears that he might be tortured. Since the US government does not believe that waterboarding is torture, I can only assume they fear he may be subjected to something worse than waterboarding.

      The US government will always claim that hostility towards Cuba is for one reason or another but the truth is that it wants control of Cuba and always has. Being a democracy is no guarantee that the US will leave you alone as the case of Venezuela amply demonstrates. The US teaches some unfortunate lessons. It teaches that if you have an open democracy, and you are not a government liked by the US (e.g. a socialist one), the US will use that openness against you, even going as far as coup attempts as was the case in Venezuela, Guatemala etc. If some future leader of Cuba does want to make a transition to democracy, he will no doubt have second thoughts after looking at US subversion in Venezuela and elsewhere.

    21. Re:Thank God by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1

      Show me some real live policies and I'll believe it; if that's what constitutes an alliance than Canada's clearly alone in the world.

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    22. Re:Thank God by Udo+Schmitz · · Score: 1

      shooting down Cessnas with MiGs continued to earn them international contempt.

      Should the bombing of DC8s also call for an embargo?
    23. Re:Thank God by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 2

      With the US pressuring every nation to stay the hell away from Cuba, the fact that Canada decided to ignore the US's diplomatic pressure and become a strong trade partner of Cuba is nothing shy of "treating them like a NATO member".

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    24. Re:Thank God by ScentCone · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      So did Venezuela

      Yeah, that Hugo Chavez... he's just misunderstood. Did he mention to you that he's also trying to annex the oil-rich part of a neighboring country right now? You know, the ol' "the maps were drawn wrong - it's always been mine" method.

      Hell, we killed Ghaddafi's daughter with a cruise missile and now we're toasting his health. What gives?

      He saw the light, unlike Castro. Libya has given up on its nuclear weapons programs, has stopped writing checks to terrorists, and so on.

      We milked Libya for $2 Billion and made them grovel in order get back on the party invite list

      We didn't "make" them. They wanted back into the world of commerce. The price they had to pay was to stop attacking it, or paying other people to do so.

      dirty little socialist tendencies

      Like, say, killing the people that try to escape it? Oh, it's just a little socialism! Who cares about gunning down people who don't want a part of it - the health care is free! And there are so many opportunities to own cars made in the 1940s.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    25. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the metric of what is right or wrong for a government is acting in the interest of their people, then the United States government is right to act in the interest of America and try to force others to do the same.

    26. Re:Thank God by stinerman · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wrote a paper for an upper-level poly sci class that was in part about Castro. I came to the conclusion that he wasn't a Marxist, but was forced to ally himself with either the Soviets or the Americans. He really didn't like the Soviets any more than he liked us, but the Bay of Pigs shot down him allying with us.

    27. Re:Thank God by C10H14N2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like, say, killing the people that try to escape it?

      Mass political murder was good enough for Pinochet, the PRI and Noriega -- and they were all good enough for us...and only one of those three was even vaguely socialist.

    28. Re:Thank God by dwye · · Score: 1

      Well, agreeing to host Soviet missiles around 1960 would qualify as a seriously shitball stunt.

      They didn't agree to host them, they requested that the missiles be moved there.

      as well as the exceptionally strong agriculture lobby in the US which really doesn't want to see a flood of cheap rice on the US market

      1) The Ag-lobby isn't particularly strong (certainly not, when compared to, say, the French Ag lobby).

      2) The problem is cheap sugar, not cheap rice. Under treaty, so long as we have trade relations with them, they get subidized access into the US market. This is one of those treaties, like the one that gives us basing rights in Gitmo, that both sides must agree to drop for either to escape.

    29. Re:Thank God by yorugua · · Score: 1

      They nationalized property without compensating international businesses.

      So did Mexico. So did Venezuela.

      News update, when Exxon asked (and got) a freeze over U$S 12.000M of PDVSA assets, Mr Chavez did not start a party but got upset and started yelling and screaming. Seems that the "nationalization" or "I'll take over your assets in a way you'll most certainly loose" is not welcome in both sides of the fence. I don't know why is that.

      From Reuters: NEW YORK, Feb 7 (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research) won court orders in the Netherlands and the Netherlands Antilles freezing assets of Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA in each jurisdiction worth up to $12 billion, according to a company spokeswoman. (Reporting by Matt Daily)

      So, let's add "so did Exxon" and see what happens. Tough Exxon freeze should be in exchange for the assets lost, if any,.... hopefully.

    30. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US Commander: Hey alien citizen! we bring you peace!... aaaand freedom!

      someone: Oh shit...

      US Commander: That's right! Roll in the Freedom Tanks boys!... oh! provide Liberty Cruise Missile Support!

      someone: Please, we rather...

      US Commander: Nonsense, the Peace Corps. Troops will oust any Oppresion! CHARGE!

      someone: Oh dear...

    31. Re:Thank God by TheSpoom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, the fact that Canada decided to ignore the US's diplomatic pressure means we aren't a subsidiary of the US, and thank God for that.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    32. Re:Thank God by rcamans · · Score: 1

      Wasn't Cuba one of the only countries to try to host nuclear missiles right by us for Russia? I am sure that that gave them a bad smell. But actually, Bush and co. love to have enemies to point at. The other countries mentioned do have vast resources of oil, etc, and we have lots of Mexican citizen American voters. Cuba has sugar. I am pretty sure we can / do get that elsewhere. They have refugees and criminals, but we get those elsewhere as well. They have drug connections... I could go on forever. In summary, the Big money / Big government of the USA sees no gains from easing up on Cuba, although maximum openness is the best way to bring our ways to them. Wait a minute, they are not polluted by our ways!? huh
      I would rather we opened up to Cuba. That is the right thing to do.

      --
      wake up and hold your nose
    33. Re:Thank God by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      The Ag-lobby isn't particularly strong (certainly not, when compared to, say, the French Ag lobby).

      You'd be surprised. There are a bunch of little farm states, all of which have 2 senators, which is just as many as California or New York. So the ag lobby is strengthened by the structural elements of the US constitution. The US also has all sorts of crap--the sugar tariff, corn subsidies, corn-based ethanol--that's intended merely to enrich the ag lobby, often with negative effects on the public as a whole. (Corn is a very poor source of ethanol, for instance.)

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    34. Re:Thank God by celle · · Score: 1

      International business, ok corporations, got what they deserved for trying and nearly succeeding in raping the country. We've got plenty of examples here in the states where such a response would be well deserved. All Castro did was do it successfully first. Business should understand if you abuse a country to plan on being tossed out and losing all investment, just like in any other market that gets abused. Current US law protects these companies and should be abolished and castrate any bastard that proposes such behavior, legal or economic. All Castro did was protect his country from american business imperialism.

    35. Re:Thank God by yorugua · · Score: 1

      Mass political murder was good enough for Pinochet, the PRI and Noriega -- and they were all good enough for us...and only one of those three was even vaguely socialist.

      Nice that you brought that up. So is not the killing part that disturbs you, is the "reason" part. So, if the "excuse" is just right, then is ok.

      Cuban's Michael Moore's or Michael Savage's would have a much harder time, anytime, than the real ones. It amuses me, in a very sad way, that some "human rights" defenders forget the share for this individuals, when they charge against the "terror de estado" (state-backed terroris) of death or imprisonment of people because of ideas.

      It's like that's "totally wrong", *EXCEPT* if it is in agreement with this other group of ideas. Then, imprisioning people, not letting them leave their country, move around, choose religion (or lack thereof), invest money, get together and talk, or write about whatever they want, is suddenly great and we can safely ignore all that and look at a "broader" picture!?

      Sorry, Castro, el "Che", Videla, Pinochet did mass murdering (Castro has the luxury to still do, or to imprision people for not being in tune with his ideas) because of political differences, and should be swiftly charged because of that. If we choose to charge some, but not others, looks like it's not the means we have a problem with, but with the excuse being used to kill/slaughter.

    36. Re:Thank God by Malevolent+Tester · · Score: 1

      I'd agree completely. Just don't act as if there's something morally deficient about foreign governments who look to their own interests first at the expense of America.

      --
      If you haven't made a developer cry, you've wasted a day.
    37. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They nationalized property without compensating international businesses. This earned them the initial embargo.
      Remind me, how did those international businesses acquire that property?
    38. Re:Thank God by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I don't recall France letting the Soviets put missiles to be aimed at the US on their territory.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    39. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if any Americans want to go abroad to get their paid-for socialist healthcare, in future...

      Oh, wait a minute, that can't even keep Castro in top form!

    40. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, though, that much of the property that was taken, was taken not from poor peasants trying to get along, but from wealthy aristocrats who had been given land by government fiat, often through corruption. Frequently this land was stolen by the government from the peasants and handed out to wealthy and influential friends of Batista's inner circle.
        And I'm not even going to go into the Mafia buying up huge swaths of the country.

        Funny thing is, you can't give that stuff back to the Cuban exiles in Florida anymore, as most of it has been bought up by large European investment firms by now.

    41. Re:Thank God by C10H14N2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nice that you brought that up. So is not the killing part that disturbs you, is the "reason" part. So, if the "excuse" is just right, then is ok.

      Back at 'ya. What's so disturbing about all the various atrocities that have been committed by dozens of countries that are apparently a-okay, even while at the height of executing said atrocities, yet when performed on a far lesser scale (and often factually questionable to any degree) make Cuba supremely evil and worthy of banning American citizens effectively from so much as setting foot there? You could travel to and spend money in the Soviet Union during the cold war, we had full diplomatic relations the entire time, and they were "the Evil Empire" supposedly hell-bent on the complete annihilation of our entire way of life under hair-trigger threat of nuclear hellfire sufficient to wipe out every city with a population exceeding fifty, yet some old coot with a cigar and a fleet of '56 Chevys is worthy of total blockade? Hell, the worst he's done is let the Russians plant three nukes on his island. For godssakes, FRANCE has more firepower pointed at us than every commie in the Western Hemisphere combined.

      Come on...

    42. Re:Thank God by STrinity · · Score: 1

      Remind me again... why is the U.S. mad at them?
      Because Cuban exiles make up a sizable portion of the voting population of Florida.

      If we really wanted to hasten the demise of Communism in Cuba, we'd lift the embargo and encourage people to go on vacation there and spend vast amounts of money.
      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    43. Re:Thank God by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone can condemn them for overthrowing Batista (though clearly the US was, during the Cold War, understandably freaked out about a Communist country on their doorstep). The problem was that Cuba turned itself from a US puppet regime to a Soviet puppet regime. Sure, Castro was given more leeway than, say Poland where Czechoslovakia, but the Soviet military was always around, and I doubt very much that Castro ever felt he had that much leeway. Besides, the Soviets were dumping lots of hard currency into Cuba and keeping the whole enterprise afloat, and we can see just how important that was to the Cuban economy, because the whole thing to a distinct shit-wise turn for the worst once the USSR collapsed and the remaining Soviet troops and Soviet rubles left.

      For the US, the biggest problem is that the Cuban-American vote in Florida is enormously powerful and politically active, and has stimied any attempt at reapproachment. No president or politician is willing to piss them off, Democrat or Republican. Maybe with Fidel Castro out of the picture, it may be more politically possible for the US to make positive inroads.

      The US has made some huge blunders in dealing with newly-born Communist countries. It fucked up completely with China when Mao, once the Nationalists were out, actually tried to make overtures, and it fucked up again when it didn't do more to try to communicate with Castro, and at least do something to encourage a neutral stance by Cuba, rather than forcing Castro to sell the country to the Soviets. That being said, it was the Cold War, and the Superpowers were hyperparanoid and trigger happy, and to be seen making buddy-buddy with Communists was a quick road to political suicide. It's a damn pity that Nixon didn't make a stop-by to Cuba on his way back from China, but China was considered less of an evil in the 1970s than the USSR, and Cuba was strictly Soviet property.

      But we tend to forget the more successful US interventions as well. The US managed to keep Italy from being seized by the Communists. It rebuilt Western Europe for precisely the same reason, to contain the Soviets. It rebuilt Japan into a strong Asian ally that really has become one of the more responsible democratic nations (though it is by no means perfect).

      The root of the problem, as I said, was the extreme paranoia and the containment policy, which allowed US officials to rationalize a lot of morally repugnant, and in some cases strategically idiotic moves. The US wouldn't have to deal with a blowhard like Chavez if it hadn't so completely fucked up in Latin America. Rather than recognizing the extreme economic/ethnic stratification of many Latin American countries, it was simply more interested in putting people into power who were as anti-Communist as possible. With the end of the USSR, the US basically just went "Well, that's over" and, unsure of what to do, didn't do very much at all. But in the meantime they had bred half a century of enmity in a region of the world that, during the 19th century, actually looked upon the US as the model to build states upon.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    44. Re:Thank God by dbrutus · · Score: 1

      Oh, I'd say emptying his prisons out and pointing his criminals north towards Florida is probably just a smidgen worse than France at its most annoying. Communist states have rapists and child molesters too, you know, and we ended up with his.

    45. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They nationalized property without compensating international businesses.
      Which is of course far worse than international business privatising the property beforehand.

      Then they became Soviet puppets.
      Because of course every other former Soviet satellite state continues to be embagoed. As does every former US puppet state. Oh, I forgot - the crime was being a *former* US puppet state that went over to the other side.

      Various acts like supporting leftist guerrillas
      Indescribably bad. Unlike the US supporting Rightist Freedom Fighters throughout Central & South America (and Asia) which has earned them international plaudits and no ongoing repercussions. No siree.

      shooting down Cessnas with MiGs

      Yes, worse than shooting down civilian airliners, fer shure.

      Meh, maybe not the best healthcare in the world, but for the (US-imposed) economic conditions, pretty damned good (compare the child mortality stats, out just this week). And available to all, not just to those who can afford insurance that actually, y'know, covers you when you're ill.

      And as for the joys of multi-party democracy as imposed by the US - they've been there and done that. And got the finest democracy money could buy (and even a mock Capitol Building). And that's where we came in...

    46. Re:Thank God by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      Was the Bay of Pigs before or after Castro and Guevara teamed up?

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    47. Re:Thank God by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1, Funny

      including the destruction of crops and what we would regard today as Al Qaeda-style bombings.

      Wow, I didn't know al Qaeda carried out suicide bombings against plants. It's amazing what headlines the global news organizations don't carry.

    48. Re:Thank God by yorugua · · Score: 1

      What's so disturbing about all the various atrocities that have been committed by dozens of countries that are apparently a-okay, even while at the height of executing said atrocities, yet when performed on a far lesser scale (and often factually questionable to any degree) make Cuba supremely evil and worthy of banning American citizens effectively from so much as setting foot there? You could travel to and spend money in the Soviet Union during the cold war, we had full diplomatic relations the entire time, and they were "the Evil Empire" supposedly hell-bent on the complete annihilation of our entire way of life under hair-trigger threat of nuclear hellfire sufficient to wipe out every city with a population exceeding fifty, yet some old coot with a cigar and a fleet of '56 Chevys is worthy of total blockade? Hell, the worst he's done is let the Russians plant three nukes on his island. For godssakes, FRANCE has more firepower pointed at us than every commie in the Western Hemisphere combined. Come on...

      In the same line of reasoning, what's so disturbing about the fact that they can't do business with the US? (I'm not an american, I don't live there). They do business with Europe, they do business with Latin American countries. The fact that they have those european-hotels has not facilitated in any means that a normal cuban can spend the night there, let alone have the money to do so (unless of course, you are in touch with the right people). I was reading another /. article about how 1/3 or something of iPhones are smuggled in again into China. Last time I checked, cuba does not allow cubans to have cell phones !

      Also, when the sugar price went thru the roof, they sold it in the new price to the old-good friend the-red-bear. What's that's with hating capitalism and stand for price fixation?

      Come on.

      he is stealing the life out of the people, while using politics as an excuse (one that serves other people in the continent an abroad to re-use the same excuse so creating sinergy), and allowing us to discuss those facts while we are maybe a few thousand km away, probably on different continents, sitting confortably on our offices, or in hour house, or while studing and on a computer connected to an uncesored internet. I don't fear anyone will come home knocking because of what I wrote here.

    49. Re:Thank God by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      "Strong allies?" We're willing to engage in commerce with Cuba; that's a little different from treating them like a NATO member or something.

      Next you'll be telling us Canada has no weapons of mass destruction.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    50. Re:Thank God by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, agreeing to host Soviet missiles around 1960 would qualify as a seriously shitball stunt.
      But did it really matter? By 1958, the Soviets had ballistic missile submarines that could launch against the U.S. with just as short warning as anything coming from Cuba.

    51. Re:Thank God by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      They didn't agree to host them, they requested that the missiles be moved there.

      Uh huh, says Pravda. Probably had nothing to do with massive Soviet assistance that drove the Cuban economy for decades.

      1) The Ag-lobby isn't particularly strong (certainly not, when compared to, say, the French Ag lobby).

      It's pretty strong in the US compared to the pro-Cuba lobby, which is the only comparison that matters.

      2) The problem is cheap sugar, not cheap rice.

      It's cheap everything, really. The role that sugar plays varies, and now it would certainly be on the upswing since it could be made into ethanol more easily than corn. Expect the ag lobby to push to further the current policy of *selling* food to Cuba, but buying nothing.

      Under treaty, so long as we have trade relations with them, they get subidized access into the US market.

      What treaty would that be? Right now, they get NO access into the US market. I'm sure that any agreement resulting in renormalization of trade would make any trade agreement dating from the early 1900s null.

      This is one of those treaties, like the one that gives us basing rights in Gitmo, that both sides must agree to drop for either to escape.

      The Castro regime doesn't generally recognize any agreements created by their predecessors. Particularly property of capitalist nations on Cuba, considering they nationalized the assets of many a US corporation. The reason we still have Gitmo, I think, is that trying to capture it would have legitimized the full-scale invasion that many in the Pentagon (among others) were itching to start. And as I recall, the Soviets weren't interested in a full-scale war with the US over Cuba, so hostile action on the part of Cuba was something they weren't willing to back up - the same approach both Russia and China took with North Korea years earlier. They were willing to help defend, but not suport an attack. So in other words, the reason we have Gitmo today without firing a shot is due to stalemate, not any agreement.

    52. Re:Thank God by bsd_usr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't lump Cubans with being the same as the rest of the Hispanic population. Anyone who has taken Latin American History, would know that Cuban-Americans are different.

      In Cuba, they're typically better educated and most, if not all, Latin American countries. Cuba also has a higher literacy rate than even the United States. There are plenty of good doctors that come from Cuba. As you already mentioned, Florida is full of Cuban politicians and lawyers. There are plenty of Cuban actors (Andy Garcia, Cameron Diaz, and more), singers (Gloria Estefan, Celia Cruz, and more), song writers (Emilio Estefan, and more) here in the U.S. as well, which makes them well represented.

      Like you mentioned, unlike most the Hispanic population Cuban-Americans typically vote Republican. Why? Maybe because we're generally more conservative? Maybe because many Cuban-Americans are businessmen? Maybe it's because Republicans have done more for Cuban-Americans than Democrats? Cubans are pretty vocal and you can almost say fanatical about politics. You can almost say that the Cuban community is even tighter than most Hispanic communities. Maybe that is because there's so few of them here. Cuban-Americans are actually a very small population when compared to other Hispanic communities (i.e. Mexican-Americans).

      Anyway, for all we know this whole resignation thing is probably because Castro is already dead and has been dead for a while. Who knows. No one has seen him in public in quite some time.

    53. Re:Thank God by rve · · Score: 1

      What has france done to the US, exactly?

    54. Re:Thank God by dwye · · Score: 1

      > (Corn is a very poor source of ethanol, for instance.)

      I agree. I very much prefer barley, aged in used sherry casks, for my ethanol needs. :-)

    55. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Remind me again... why is the U.S. mad at them?"

      Because of a large, very politically important Cuban-American population in south Florida. All the other "reasons" people are posting are completely beside the point. Miami still has lots of "Kill Castro" bumper stickers.

      Looking through the rest of this topic, you have the usual stupid leftist defenders popping up. Let's see... Cuba is a swell place, just like Michael Moore and his ilk imply. Yeah, that explains all the people trying to leave the US and immigrate to Cuba... oh, wait a minute, it's the OTHER FREAKING WAY AROUND YOU ULTRA-IDIOTS!!!!!

    56. Re:Thank God by dwye · · Score: 1

      They didn't agree to host them, they requested that the missiles be moved there.

      Uh huh, says Pravda. Probably had nothing to do with massive Soviet assistance that drove the Cuban economy for decades.

      Except that there had been no massive assistance at the time, since the Castro regime was only a few years old, then, and still doing well from confiscation of existing wealth.

      1) The Ag-lobby isn't particularly strong (certainly not, when compared to, say, the French Ag lobby).

      It's pretty strong in the US compared to the pro-Cuba lobby, which is the only comparison that matters.

      If you mean, the pro-Communist Cuba lobby, well, yes. They are more powerful than the NAMBLA lobby, but just barely.

      Under treaty, so long as we have trade relations with them, they get subidized access into the US market.

      What treaty would that be? Right now, they get NO access into the US market. I'm sure that any agreement resulting in renormalization of trade would make any trade agreement dating from the early 1900s null.

      I do not know which treaty it was, but the point was that only banning all importation from Cuba prevents them from insisting on their subsidies. When it was signed, we got cheaper sugar from buying a large part of their crop; now, since there is a US sugar industry (two industries, actually, sugar cane and sugar beets have entirely separate areas, owners, etc.) that has grown up since the start of the Embargo, we would be stuck with the cheap sugar, killing most of our domestic production. As to an agreement renormalizing trade, our embargo is entirely unilateral. The Cuban government can just sit back and wait (technically, they have offered to sell to us for years) for us to change our policy, then send in their lawyers to get their trade subsidies back.

    57. Re:Thank God by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Eventually there was an invasion attempt (bay of Pigs)

      That's the sort of invasion you have when the military does not want it and the President opposes it. It's the age of story of a very partisan government agency that dislikes the new head of a government deciding to see how far they can push the new government. It was probably completely successful in this way because the USA appears to have been knee deep in uncontrolled spooks for most of the time since then.

    58. Re:Thank God by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The airliner was Iranian payback but Libya was closer and it took until after Tripoli was bombed to work out the details behind that plot. There is also oil which if nothing else made Libya's economy large enough that they can't be completely ignored. IMHO the final thing that caused the change in relations was the condolances offered for 9/11. Since the USA is conducting joint operations with Algeria of all places there are far more dubious freinds than Ghaddafi in that part of the world.

    59. Re:Thank God by Jarik_Tentsu · · Score: 1

      True, they made enemies of USA by getting rid of US owned businesses...but if I was Castro and these businesses was what was funding the dictatorship there, I don't think I would feel like compensating either. True, it also makes the embargo reasonable, but yeah...

      Castro was an inexperienced leader who did some stupid things too. But as a person, I feel he genuinely cared for his country and his people...and wasn't going to let anyone - USA or even Soviet Union - get in his way.

      There were so many times he outright defied the Soviet Union in an attempt to make his ideals a reality - something which made them have to make an ultimatum to force him to become their puppets.

      So yeah...maybe it was the fact he wasn't a great politician/leader, that let him cut out some of the bullshit and become more genuine...not saying it's necessarily a bad thing he's out of power now...Just have a lot of respect for the guy.

      ~Jarik

    60. Re:Thank God by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      You could travel to and spend money in the Soviet Union during the cold war, we had full diplomatic relations the entire time, and they were "the Evil Empire" supposedly hell-bent on the complete annihilation of our entire way of life under hair-trigger threat of nuclear hellfire sufficient to wipe out every city with a population exceeding fifty...


      Like, DUH! Do you think we (the US) wanted to have diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union? Hell no! It was their nuclear stockpile precisely why we maintained relations with them. Our relationship with them was along the lines of "Ok, stay calm. Don't push the shiny red button ok. We clear? Cool cool...ok now...*sigh*

      Cuba on the other hand no longer posed a threat which is why we diplomatically kicked them to the curb. I'm not saying it was right, but that's how it was and continues to be.
      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    61. Re:Thank God by hachete · · Score: 1

      The USSR installed nukes in Cuba because the USA had just installed nukes in Turkey, IIRC. Tit for tat.

      Also, again IIRC, land-based missles are always more accurate. Somone will correct me if I'm wrong.

      --
      Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
    62. Re:Thank God by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

      Good luck. Dept of State has stated that it won't change current policy:
      http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1152ap_us_castro.html

      I have a brother-in-law that is American born Cuban who would like to visit and bring things back from Cuba which his parents always talk about things in Cuba that they can never get in the US (ie cigars).
      BTW the cigars made in Cuba are really not as good as ones made by expatriates of Cuba since the tobacco in Cuba has problems due to diseases, drought and other factors that made the tobacco poor quality in the recent years so the reason for people wanting Cuban cigars because it a "embargoed" object.

    63. Re:Thank God by jjk3 · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the interesting post, but one thing I don't get is this:

      The US government will always claim that hostility towards Cuba is for one reason or another but the truth is that it wants control of Cuba and always has.
      I get that we may have wanted it one point, but why would we want it now? I understand why we may want to invade and occupy the middle east (Not that I agree), but I'm not sure what Cuba has to offer.

      Thanks,

      Joe

    64. Re:Thank God by AdmiralAudio · · Score: 1

      I hope you're not implying that all good cigars can only come from Cuba.

    65. Re:Thank God by Descalzo · · Score: 1

      Did he mention to you that he's also trying to annex the oil-rich part of a neighboring country right now?
      Could I get a link for that please? I've been thinking for a long time that if there's a South American version of the Sudetenland, they should watch out.
      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    66. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      I get that we may have wanted it one point, but why would we want it now?

      Great cropland for tobacco and sugar, excellent launching point for anyone attacking the US, fantastic vacation property for politicians, and large recently discovered oil reserves. Cuba has all kinds of things that would appeal to the US.

    67. Re:Thank God by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Could I get a link for that please?

      Just takes some Googling. Apparently this spat has been evolving for a while.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    68. Re:Thank God by cas2000 · · Score: 1


      do you have that from any *credible* news source? fox news certainly isn't.

    69. Re:Thank God by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      do you have that from any *credible* news source? fox news certainly isn't.

      Really? You'd prefer Venezuela's state-run news, and Chavez-controlled airwaves? Which information presented in the article I happened to link to did you find to be actually incorrect, historically or in terms of its representations of current events? Or, are you just a blowhard? Ah, I see.

      Still, do a little homework. Venezuela can't stand the idea of US firms doing things like setting up rocket launch sites in Guyana . You'll recall that Chavez's nationalization of other people's investments is now his normal behavior, and his inclinations in this area are the same.

      Don't like Fox? How about the The SF Gate? . Is that idealogically left-enough of a publication for you? They report on Guyana's complaint about Chavez's military destroying Guyana-operated dredging equipment outside of Venezuela's borders. The border agreement to which Venezuela a signee a century ago is now "null," according to Chavez (funny how he's recently decided that, now that third parties are investing in mineral extraction work in an area he'd like to harvest - since he can't make money off of his heavily sulfurous crude oil without sending to the US for refinement).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    70. Re:Thank God by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Well, if any Americans want to go abroad to get their paid-for socialist healthcare, in future...

      Oh, wait a minute, that can't even keep Castro in top form!

      He's 81 and he smoked a lot of cigars, give him a break. And say what you want about the bastard, Cuban medical care is good.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    71. Re:Thank God by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      >> Remind me again... why is the U.S. mad at them?

      > France has pulled worse shitball stunts against you than Cuba has.
      > They nationalized property without compensating international businesses. This earned them the initial embargo. Then
      > they became Soviet puppets. This made it permanent. And when they refused to change when Carter dropped the embargo
      > they lost the sympathy of future administrations that restored it. Various acts like supporting leftist guerrillas or
      > shooting down Cessnas with MiGs continued to earn them international contempt.


      Oh yea... one more thing... they snuck a buch of nukes onto the island, pointed 'em at us, and wanted to use them. (ok, fine, I've only heard about the 'wanting to use them' bit... I wasn't there).

      Just like you wouldn't soon forget if a neighbor pointed a gun at your head or want to be very friendly with him, U.S. Presidents have a memory just like that. I suppose Christians might turn the other cheeck and forgive, but what about Presidents?

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
    72. Re:Thank God by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      i didn't ask for a right-wing propaganda rant, i asked if you had a credible source for the claim you made.

      fox news is not a credible source.

      pointing out that there are other non-credible sources does not in any way make fox news a credible source. it just states the obvious.

      i have no idea whether SF Gate is a credible source or not. i've never read it. by 'credible source', i mean 'internationally recognised credible news service', not just another one of the many US-centric parochial newspapers.

      i'd accept BBC news as a reasonably credible source (which is not to say that i would uncritically believe anything and everything they might publish).

      by way of illustration: whereas on a scale of 1 to 10 i would give Fox News a credibility score of 1 or 2 (at best - on anything political, they'd rate negative), i would rate BBC News at least a 6 or 7.

    73. Re:Thank God by Descalzo · · Score: 1
      Oh, I googled it, but didn't find anything about the mainland. Something about the Dutch Antilles, and that was apocryphal.

      Thank you.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    74. Re:Thank God by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 1

      land-based missles are always more accurate. Somone will correct me if I'm wrong.
      That's not true now, with GPS, but it was true back then. You probably wouldn't know your own position closer than within a few miles if you weren't in sight of shore.

    75. Re:Thank God by bsd_usr · · Score: 1


      Cool. What's she like? Cuban moms can be a pain in the ass sometimes. Always meddling in your business. LOL Hopefully, she can make a mean batch of Arroz con Pollo.

    76. Re:Thank God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn to read.

    77. Re:Thank God by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      i didn't ask for a right-wing propaganda rant

      Sure you did, by framing your objection to the reporter's coverage of the events in political terms.

      i would rate BBC News at least a 6 or 7

      Fine . Again - who is more credible to you on this? Who gets a 10? Chavez's own propogandists? Cuba's? The events in question are political. If your sympathies lie with Chavez, then any reporting that mentions the possibility of his troops trashing the mining facilities of a rival neighbor are going to annoy you, I suppose.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    78. Re:Thank God by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      > > i didn't ask for a right-wing propaganda rant
      > Sure you did, by framing your objection to the reporter's coverage of the events in political terms.


      i didn't. i said that fox news isn't a credible source. here's what i said: "do you have that from any *credible* news source? fox news certainly isn't.".

      to deduce that that's a political criticism is to acknowledge the fact that fox news is pure political propaganda.

      > [ link to bbc news article ]

      compare the two articles. the fox news link was to a blog post which had an agenda to push and made numerous unsubstantiated claims to support its agenda. the article's agenda was to push the idea that venezuela is evil and expansionist, that it's just like iraq and chavez is saddam hussein's ideological brother.

      the BBC News article reported the known facts, reported comments from both sides of the dispute, and didn't take a position that supported one side or the other - the tone of the BBC article was neutral and the reporter's personal opinion was not evident, nor could it readily be deduced. i.e. the reporter did as he or she is supposed to do and made an effort to stick to the facts and keep their personal opinion out of it.

      > Again - who is more credible to you on this? Who gets a 10? Chavez's own propogandists? Cuba's?

      nobody gets a 10. ever.

      doubting the accuracy of fox news does not make one a stooge of chavez.

      > The events in question are political. If your sympathies lie with Chavez,
      > then any reporting that mentions the possibility of his troops trashing the mining
      > facilities of a rival neighbor are going to annoy you, I suppose.


      that would be because you're an american and have no actual experience of any unbiased news source, or one with any journalistic integrity. to you, news IS all just partisan propaganda, and the only purpose for facts is to use or ignore them depending on whether they support the position that's being argued or not.

      no newspaper is perfect, but i'd much rather read one that has a tradition of non-bias and journalistic integrity, rather than one that takes sides and has an agenda to push (no matter what that agenda is - loony left propaganda is no more palatable than right wing fascist propaganda).

    79. Re:Thank God by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      > Again - who is more credible to you on this? Who gets a 10? Chavez's own propogandists? Cuba's?

      nobody gets a 10. ever.

      Then what is the point of having a 1-10 scale? You can't have that if nobody can reach 10. Instead it just becomes 1-9.

  2. Why so early? by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 1

    I thought he'd at least stay to witness the election of Obama and have a nice dinner with former pres W Bush!

  3. Mission accomplished! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Bay of Pigs Invasion finally draws to a successful conclusion, a mere 47 years behind schedule.

    1. Re:Mission accomplished! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can only hope that Iraq will go so quickly... although McCain said we would be happy to stay for 100 years (but he'll be dead long before that time is up).

    2. Re:Mission accomplished! by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Bay of Pigs Invasion finally draws to a successful conclusion, a mere 47 years behind schedule.

      The only thing that ever beat Duke Nuke'm Forever in terms of a release date.

      --
      ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
    3. Re:Mission accomplished! by contraba55 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That remains to be seen.

    4. Re:Mission accomplished! by somersault · · Score: 1

      Give it time..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:Mission accomplished! by v1 · · Score: 1

      ~~Behold the flying cow with a railgun!~~
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Mission accomplished! (Score:5, Funny)
      by contraba55 (1217056) on Tuesday February 19, @08:27AM (#22474412)
      That remains to be seen.


      Sorry but that particular combination of sig and followup comment was just too good to overlook...

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    6. Re:Mission accomplished! by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      Good thing you posted AC, I'm sure it's no stretch for the secret service to say that's a death threat.

      And now by replying, I'm probably an accomplice to this "grave terrorist threat", amirite?

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
  4. News For Nerds by whisper_jeff · · Score: 0

    While I won't argue that this is big news, because it obviously is, I must confess that I'm struggling to see how this is news for nerds. Beyond nerds being people who are interested in the world at large like everyone else, of course. But if we're going to be getting news that interests people who are interested in the world at large, when can we expect to see /. posts about Brad and Angelina?

  5. So does this mean by YojimboJango · · Score: 1

    So does this mean that we can get our fancy cigars again?

    1. Re:So does this mean by plague3106 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You must be the only person that wasn't getting them all along. ;-)

    2. Re:So does this mean by 1729 · · Score: 4, Informative

      So does this mean that we can get our fancy cigars again?

      Ironically, the end of the embargo will probably make it harder for Americans to get genuine Habanos, at least for a while. As of now, it isn't difficult to have Cubans cigars delivered to the USA from an authorized Habanos SA retailer. However, the demand for Cuban cigars already exceeds the supply (unless you're interested in the infamous Glass Top Cohibas), so the influx of Americans interested in trying these forbidden cigars will result in shortages around the world. The newly-legal cigars will also be met by large numbers of fakes, making it even more difficult to get the real thing.
    3. Re:So does this mean by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 1

      screw the cigars, I want to get some of their cars. http://www.danheller.com/cuba-cars.html

      with the lack of salt in the air and constant maintenance, those cars are in great condition and are worth a fortune in the US.

  6. Cool by afidel · · Score: 2

    Does this mean the expat's in Miami will finally shut up and I can visit Havana soon (legally).

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Cool by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      Depends - with elections on the 24th, that only gives 5 days for campaigns. The candidates have their work cut out for them!! When will they find time for the debates, primaries, national conventions...

    2. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No.

      Now they will complain that all their land and wealth they left behind in Cuba must be returned to them with interest. Suddenly all of them were billionaires and owned 1/5th the island. Etc...

      There is one thing that is universal in humanity, they all like to complain.

    3. Re:Cool by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 5, Funny

      The candidates have their work cut out for them!! When will they find time for the debates, primaries, national conventions...

      Did you mean to use the plural there?

      --
      "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
    4. Re:Cool by DustyShadow · · Score: 1

      Can't you legally visit Cuba by flying through Mexico? I have friends who have done this.

    5. Re:Cool by value_added · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does this mean the expat's in Miami will finally shut up and I can visit Havana soon (legally).

      The Miami crowd has too much to lose to allow that to happen. And they have enough political influence to prevent someone from dismissing them any time soon, despite a willingness by the American public to adopt a new perspective, keen interest by big business, and numerous attempts over the years by legislators and other interested parties who consider the current policy a long and drawn out failure to change the situation.

      Besides, who in Cuba do you think is, or is going to be, running things?

      On a side note, the term "expats" (no "s" needed, thankyou) I would reserve for someone like the English hanging out in the bars of Santa Monica, CA, watching football and drinking Guiness. The Miami crowd, on the other hand, will carry their memories, resentments and feelings forward for generations to come. Think of the Kurds in Iraq, the Palestinians in Israel, and both the Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo, among countless other examples, and you'll get the idea.

      Tourists, cigar afficionados and late 50's model car enthusiasts will have to wait.

    6. Re:Cool by afidel · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, that's very much against federal law. It's stupid as can be because it's a unilateral embargo that has little effect in the real world but not keeping it up would have been political suicide due to all the expats in southern Florida. As an individual you are unlikely to get in much trouble, but for example a coworker of mine can't risk it, she's a greencard holder from Canada who might be thrown in jail upon returning if it was found out she had been in Cuba and would almost assuredly have her greencard revoked.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    7. Re:Cool by mrxak · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty cynical, but even I don't think the Cubans living in the US are going to try to interfere with relations now that Castro is gone just for some sort of political power. Now granted if Cuba ends up with somebody just as bad, that's another issue, but if there are changes in Cuba, I'm sure a lot of those people will at the very least want to visit or trade.

    8. Re:Cool by gmack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's important to note that, if it weren't for the embargo to blame all of Cuba's economic troubles on, Fidel Castro likely wouldn't have lasted nearly as long as he did.

      The political lobbying by the Cubans in Florida had the exact opposite affect from the one the wanted.

    9. Re:Cool by NMerriam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can't you legally visit Cuba by flying through Mexico? I have friends who have done this.


      No, it's illegal for an American to go under any circumstances (other than "educational" trips and a few exceptions like that), though it is rarely enforced. So yes, plenty of people go through another country, but you can't tell the guys at customs and immigration you were there on your return or you may find yourself getting fined.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    10. Re:Cool by DustyShadow · · Score: 1

      No, that's very much against federal law. Interesting. I have friends at USC School of Business and they did a class trip to Cuba. I was under the impression that it was sponsored by the school. Maybe it wasn't.
    11. Re:Cool by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Does this mean the expat's in Miami will finally shut up

      The expat's what? And which expat are you referring to?

      Or do you simply not know when and wnen not to use an apostrophe? Go see Bob, he'll fix you up.

      -mcgrew

      (Eye muss bee knew hear?)

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    12. Re:Cool by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      It's important to note that, if it weren't for the embargo to blame all of Cuba's economic troubles on, Fidel Castro likely wouldn't have lasted nearly as long as he did.

      The political lobbying by the Cubans in Florida had the exact opposite affect from the one the wanted. Just like most U.S. government decisions. We have an embargo that empowers a dictator, we give aid to 3rd world countries that arms militias, we have a war on terror that has increased global terrorism, and a war on drugs that has sky rocketed drug profits. That's alright though, we're sure to keep up the status quo with Clinton/Obama/McCain!
      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    13. Re:Cool by Bloodoflethe · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I think he forgot which dictatorship he's dealing with here.

      He also seems to forget that "s" =/= "apostrophe" in his parenthetical.

      --
      "Little is much when little you need."
    14. Re:Cool by afidel · · Score: 1

      There are limited exceptions. For example a farmer who is organizing food donations can visit to meet with the people who will be receiving and distributing the stuff. I'm not sure how a school of business trip would get an exemption as the whole purpose of the embargo is to stop economic flow from the US to Cuba.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    15. Re:Cool by GiMP · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're not allowed to go to Cuba, but many do regardless. You're also not allowed to spend money while there, iirc.

      Something I found funny last year... Poland, as a former communist nation has enjoyed tourism to Cuba for decades. It is a popular vacation spot. Hunting for an exotic vacation, we visited several travel agencies, and kept getting pushed deal to go to Cuba.. it was quite shocking for them to hear that as US Citizens we weren't allowed to go there. Remember, we're quite still allowed to go to all kinds of other states, including but not limited to Russia, Belarus, Iran, and China.

    16. Re:Cool by kaos07 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Er, no.

      The Cubans who migrated to Florida are absolutely nothing like the Kurds, Palestinians or Albanians. The latter were all either invaded, occupied or attacked by an external force and currently live under occupation. The Cubans who fled after the revolution were by and large supporters of the corrupt Batista Government, wealthy and couldn't handle the idea of a socialist Cuba so they ran away to the United States where they could indulge in capitalism to their hearts content.

      They, unlike the Kurds or Palestinians, don't face constant military harassment, shellings, occupations, interventions, assassinations or kidnappings. They relax in their condo's and bitch about how bad Cuba has gone while sipping on mojito's.

    17. Re:Cool by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      Don't forget an O'riely boycott, a certified way of increasing imports from your country. Maybe the new leader should get on TV piss Bill of, just to get a boycott

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    18. Re:Cool by nbert · · Score: 1

      you can't tell the guys at customs and immigration you were there on your return or you may find yourself getting fined
      This makes me curious: Don't they put a stamp or visa in your passport when you enter/leave Cuba? All countries I've been to do this (including US for non-US citizens). In that case it would be fairly easy for customs to figure.
    19. Re:Cool by BlueStraggler · · Score: 1

      You're not allowed to go to Cuba, but many do regardless. You're also not allowed to spend money while there, iirc.

      Those are the laws in the USA. In Cuba, however, the laws are quite friendly to Americans. US dollars are the official currency of trade, and there are plenty of US dollars flying around where ever you find tourists and business people. And when you enter the country, Americans get special treatment - no stamps in your passport, because it might get you in trouble back home. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

    20. Re:Cool by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      You're not allowed to go to Cuba, but many do regardless. You're also not allowed to spend money while there, iirc.

      According to the State Department, journalists, government officials, and certain professionals going for academic reasons may travel to Cuba without a specific license from the Treasury Department to do so. Licenses to travel to Cuba are required for people visiting family members, students and instructors participating in programs at least 10 weeks in length, staff from schools sponsoring such programs, researchers, and Cuban scholars teaching or presenting at US colleges or universities. Licenses may also be issued, subject to some limitations, for religious or humanitarian organizations; athletes, actors, singers, and others participating in public performances or exhibitions; and those involved in the export of what goods are allowed through the embargo.

      Money can be spent as part of staying there, too. It's kind of hard to eat or get a hotel room or taxi without paying for it.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    21. Re:Cool by bondjamesbond · · Score: 0

      Theo? Is that you? Are you still sore about your DARPA deal flopping?

    22. Re:Cool by value_added · · Score: 1

      The Cubans who migrated to Florida are absolutely nothing like the Kurds, Palestinians or Albanians.

      They aren't if your criteria involves armed agression and social strife. If you examine the middle and upper classes of any of those populations, or their expatriot counterparts, you'll find the similarities I was pointing out. My point was not that the groups were analogous (which is absurd), but that given a history of intense conflict, members of a given group are only to happy to pass around or hand down the resentments until it becomes a cultural badge of honour. The Miami crowd stands to lose their sense of aggrieved identity (to say nothing of the countless millions at stake), if they modify their attitudes or relinquish their right to be pissed off. And everyone who depends on them continuing to be pissed off (politician asking for contributions, government officials needing to justify their jobs, lawyers of all sorts, corporations who lost out, etc.) are only too happy to help them. And vice versa.

      Incidentally, you left out the Serbs. Those living in Kosovo, and elsewhere.

    23. Re:Cool by NMerriam · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, if you ask they don't stamp a US Passport. It's the same as in Israel, because other middle eastern countries won't admit someone with a stamp from Israel, if you ask they'll just stamp a temporary page for you that you can get rid of after you leave.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    24. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Cubans who migrated to Florida are absolutely nothing like the Kurds, Palestinians or Albanians.

      Kurds, Palestinians, and Albanians listen to better music.

    25. Re:Cool by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      No - I got it right. Candidates in Cuban is spelled Raul.

    26. Re:Cool by GiMP · · Score: 1

      I was aware of this, but was referring to the general case; however, you're right that special permission may be granted.

    27. Re:Cool by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I would add that the war on drugs has sky-rocketed drug profits while lowering the cost of drugs. Pot is a $1 a joint now and I read that cocaine is 1/3 the inflation adjusted price it was in the 1980's.

      And along with this, we have destroyed the government of mexico. There is essentially no real police or judicial system in most of these countries any more. If they touch anything associated with the drug cartel, they know they will be killed. Many of them went with reality and now work for the drug cartels (who have billions in assets) including the mexican military.

      The second we legalize pot and cocaine, all those countries will start healing and becoming good societies again.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    28. Re:Cool by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Actually things have changed. They never stamp now unless you specifically ask them to. And that has been the case for at least a few years. Unfortunately the lack of a stamp is, along with the third country exit/entry stamps, a sort of proof that you have been there. It is not possible for a US citizen to travel to Cuba risk free. Especially with the new necessity of carrying a passport instead of a drivers license and birth certificate to travel to Mexico/Canada (and presumably the Bahamas and Jamaica as well). I wasn't aware that Israel could also be a source for the lack of a stamp. If there are any direct flights to Israel from Canada/Mexico/Bahamas/Jamaica or any of the Latin American countries with direct flights to Havana (Argentina, Venezueula, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Colombia etc.) that could be a source of plausible deniability for travel to Cuba. Interesting.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    29. Re:Cool by Belisarivs · · Score: 1

      So most of the thousands of boat people that fled Cuba in 1994 were really ex-Batista supports or rich capitalists?

    30. Re:Cool by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Not all countries do exit stamps. Canada doesn't. So if you went to Canada and then to Cuba (and Canada does have flights to Cuba) there'd be no evidence. Passport just has a Canada entry stamp.

      Also it isn't as though they check your stamps when you come back from Canada. I'm a dual citizen so I don't get any stamps at all on crossing the border (I use my Canadian passport when I go up there, my US Passport when I come back). They have never checked or commented on the fact that there are 0 stamps in the passport.

    31. Re:Cool by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      A chance to link to the J Curve! I'm so delighted.

      In all seriousness though, it is fairly ironic that after decades of attempts to undermine and destroy Castro by any means necessary (except perhaps through friendliness), he resigns as one of the longest running heads of state in history. Excuse me while I go see how well we're doing beating up Al-Qaeda.

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    32. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you, but may I ask why you choose to post incessantly to an American message board about American issues? If I had a similar mental unbalance that caused me to believe Canadians were all a bunch of fascists, I wouldn't spend all day posting to Canadian message boards.

  7. Ironic statement by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I neither will aspire to nor will I accept -- I repeat -- I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief"

    Funny... he said something very similar when he and his revolutionaries kicked out Batista in the first place.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    1. Re:Ironic statement by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it dont matter. the USA will find another reason to hate Cuba and continue the embargo

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Ironic statement by shma · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Or worse, they might try another invasion:

      US President George W Bush said the news should mark the beginning of a transition towards democracy for Cuba.

      "The international community should work with the Cuban people to begin to build institutions that are necessary for a democracy, and eventually this transition ought to lead to free and fair elections," he told reporters in Rwanda.

      "And we're going to help. The United States will help the people of Cuba realize the blessings of liberty."


      How did it go last time they tried to make a country realize the blessings of liberty?

      --
      I came here for a good argument
    3. Re:Ironic statement by cain · · Score: 1

      Cite?

    4. Re:Ironic statement by yorugua · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to be outdone, Fidel also tried to spread the "Blessings" of his kind of government with a strong fist and gun powder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Cuba#Cuban_Military_Action.27s_in_Angola_.281961-2002.29 Maybe you'll love going to live to some of those places if they are still true to Fidel's ideals.

    5. Re:Ironic statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or worse, they might try another invasion: Unless that would benefit the Saudi's in some way, I'd doubt that.
    6. Re:Ironic statement by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1, Interesting

      How did it go last time they tried to make a country realize the blessings of liberty?

      According to your link, there have been 3,963 American deaths in the war in Iraq as of February 18, 2008. According to Wikipedia, there were 416,800 American deaths in World War II. Even the American Revolutionary War had between 8,000 and 50,000 casualties, depending on how you count.

      Liberty is expensive, but it's cheaper than ever. There are many reasons to criticize the Iraq war, but the number of casualties is not one of them.

    7. Re:Ironic statement by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yours is one interpretation.

      That link also points out that Unita were allied with (apartheid) South Africa, also being financed by the US under Reagan and Bush. S Africa's support ended when Nelson Mandela was elected. At one point the MPLA offered free, supervised elections, when Unita lost them they started fighting again. The war finally ended when Unita's leader Joseph Savimbi died and Unita fell apart. Estimates of the numbers killed vary from 500 000 to 1 500 000, basically to satisfy Savimbi's ego.

      As African governments go, the MPLA are reasonable.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    8. Re:Ironic statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you actually do some research into the angolan conflict you will find it lead to the end of appartied in south africa and the liberation of namibia
      "Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro... Cuban internationalists have done so much for African independence, freedom, and justice. We admire the sacrifices of the Cuban people in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of a vicious imperialist campaign designed to destroy the advances of the Cuban revolution. We too want to control our destiny... There can be no surrender. It is a case of freedom or death. The Cuban revolution has been a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people."
      Nelson Mandela

    9. Re:Ironic statement by AndGodSed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the Angolan war was South Africa's Vietnam. My uncle fought there, as well as a few people I know, also against Cubans in Botswana.

      My uncle and the other guys are still messed up about that.

      War is usually a bad idea...

    10. Re:Ironic statement by presarioD · · Score: 1, Troll

      Liberty is expensive, but it's cheaper than ever.

      you've got to love it when americans refer to their fellow men (who were lied into giving their lives up for a shady but very lucrative cause) in derogatory terms like these... let me guess... nobody from your family entered this super-deal "bargain"? Talking about dehumanizing culture of cannibals...

      It seems though the "liberty warriors" that actually make it out of that hell you're cheerleading about are having some...consciousness problems... committing suicide in the end...let me guess..."liberty is cheap but hard"... just give me a moment to throw up in disgust knowing that I belong to the same species as you... carry on, nothing to see here...

      --
      Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
    11. Re:Ironic statement by bondjamesbond · · Score: 0

      Yes! GW can continue his practice of clubbing baby seals.

    12. Re:Ironic statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting that you only count the American deaths in Iraq. I guess the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that have died 'receiving the gift of liberty' don't count.

    13. Re:Ironic statement by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      4,000 is about 400 a year.

      The death rate from the iraq war is less than any other listed causes here.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

      Heck, 50 people a year die in all terrain vehicle deaths.

      Life is cheap. A lot of the guys in iraq want to be there for at least a year or two. A lot of guys join the military to go fight, blow shit up, etc. knowing that some of them will die (but always assuming it will be someone else).

      Then we have relative death rates-- if life is valuable. Are we paying 400 deaths a year to prevent 8,000 iraqi deaths a year? If so, is it worth it? Seems like it should be. Likewise, we may be preventing a lot of american and european deaths by focusing fundamentalist passion on iraq (and I mean- come'on, these thugs use retarded ladies as bombs).

      Then there is the "life is too valuable" factor. If we do not start dying off at a higher rate soon, we are going to get in to seriously ugly situations in 30 to 50 years. Then the death rate will be amazing. It will be like a bad sci-fi movie with not enough water, collapsing eco-systems, 1% of the population completely dominating the rest of the world (with no further hope of revolution or change) composed of wage slaves with just enough illusion of freedom to keep them satiated.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    14. Re:Ironic statement by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1

      Liberty is expensive, but it's cheaper than ever. There are many reasons to criticize the Iraq war, but the number of casualties is not one of them.

      Unless you care enough to count the Iraqi casualties (though, of course, I am given to understand that they're terrorists, every one of 'em, and had it coming anyway).

      Or, you know, the 29,000 reported American wounded. I'm sure they'd also love being referred to more or less as currency.

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    15. Re:Ironic statement by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      Iraqui casualties are not mentioned in the linked article.

    16. Re:Ironic statement by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      Unless you care enough to count the Iraqi casualties (though, of course, I am given to understand that they're terrorists, every one of 'em, and had it coming anyway).

      Iraqi casualties are not mentioned in the linked article. Nor are the Kurds who died under Saddam's regime.

      Or, you know, the 29,000 reported American wounded. I'm sure they'd also love being referred to more or less as currency.

      Is that an argument? It looks more to me like crying about how I worded things.

      War always costs lives. It sucks to think about, but these decisions have to be made one way or another, and it's best for everyone that they be made on a rational basis. shma pointed out the number of casualties in the Iraq war as if it were a disproportionately large number. It is not.

    17. Re:Ironic statement by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      In your mind, was the American revolutionary war worth it? It was basically a war over taxes.

    18. Re:Ironic statement by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      Casualties != death

      There are about 30,000 American wounded as well, and they are part of the casualty count.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    19. Re:Ironic statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like Libya. Oh wait.

    20. Re:Ironic statement by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080219/D8UTC77G2.html

      From the end of the article:

      Castro launched his revolutionary battle as a young man, organizing an unsuccessful July 26, 1953 attack on a military barracks in the eastern city of Santiago.

      Later freed under a pardon, Castro went to Mexico and organized a rebel army that returned to Cuba and rallied support in the Sierra Maestra mountains. His rebels took power when Batista was forced to flee.

      Entering Havana triumphantly, Castro declared: "Power does not interest me, and I will not take it."

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  8. Bah. Means nothing. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

    His brother [Wolfman Jack impersonation] Raooooooouuuuuuul! [/Wolfman jack impersonation] will take over on the 24th and it will business as usual. Raoul has been running the country, more or less, since 2006 anyway. And the Cuban people pretty much abominate him as much as Fidel himself.

  9. Nothing will happen by rvw · · Score: 1

    This will not change anything, until he dies. As long as he is alive, they will respect him, and I doubt there will be something like a new revolution. When he dies, that's another story.

  10. Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 2, Funny

    Free the political prisoners. Free the press. Allow criticism of the state. Allow the existance of other political parties. Hold free elections. Until these acts happen, Cuba is just another repressive government we don't want to read about on slashdot.

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    1. Re:Yawn... by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good idea. While we're at it, let's pretend China doesn't exist, either. There shall be no discussion of any computer made there.

    2. Re:Yawn... by tokul · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Free the political prisoners.
      Are you sure that USA wouldn't object to such actions on its military base?
    3. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >Free the press. Allow criticism of the state. Allow the existance of other political parties. Hold free elections.

      Maybe a good idea for the US as well ?
      political prisoners: let's talk about guantanamo.
      press: in the hands of a few extremely rich people tied to one of the 2 parties.
      criticism of the state: you get lynched if you dare criticise the war in Iraq
      other political parties: 2 parties is NOT a democracy.
      free elections : see previous point.

    4. Re:Yawn... by wall0159 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "Free the political prisoners. Free the press. Allow criticism of the state. Allow the existance of other political parties. Hold free elections. Until these acts happen,"

      funnily enough, I read this much of your post without knowing which country you were talking about...

    5. Re:Yawn... by z0M6 · · Score: 1

      So by your standard, USA is another oppressed country that we don't want to read about on slashdot.

    6. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free the political prisoners. Free the press. Allow criticism of the state. Allow the existance of other political parties. Hold free elections. Until these acts happen, Cuba is just another repressive government we don't want to read about on slashdot.

      Oh holy crap.. the USA has become Cuba.

      We have a crap load of Political prisoners.
      We do not have a truly free press anymore, it's gone underground or to designated free speech zones, you get teargassed and tazered if you dare to speak your mind outside those zones.

      Only 2 political parties are actually allowed, really it's true. Where are the libertarian candidates at the debates?

      Elections are rigged.
      Police state at our borders.
      Police state in our airports.
      Police allowed to spy on the citizens.
      We need our papers for travel.

      Can I emigrate to Cuba? Because they don't have the last four on my list yet. Canada is not an option, they will obey the commercial masters and enact the same laws and do what we tell them to do. Also it's damn cold in Canada, Cuba at least has great weather.

    7. Re:Yawn... by DurendalMac · · Score: 3, Informative

      Political prisoners: Guantanamo is inexcusable, but I'd hardly call those guys political prisoners, especially not the kind that Castro locks up. Press: And you can choose sources outside of Murdoch. Imagine that! Criticism of the State: Are you serious? Yeah, look at all those presidential candidates getting lynched! Look at most of the country getting lynched! You're an imbecile. The government will not doing anything other than call you names if you criticize Iraq. That's all within the realm of free speech. Quit your utterly baseless whining. Other political parties: Yeah, two parties sucks, but guess what? There is no legal restriction to two parties. Anyone can run. If the people choose to vote for two parties, then that's what they do. It's still a republic (we're not a democracy), so quit bitching. Free elections: Your previous post did nothing to address that. Idiot. I don't know why I bothered responding to an AC, but this kind of ignorant crap just pisses me off. Things aren't so hot in the US right now, but it's far, FAR better than Cuba.

    8. Re:Yawn... by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Funny

      OK, let's discuss the computers made in Cuba. You go first.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    9. Re:Yawn... by pipatron · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Free the political prisoners. Free the press. Allow criticism of the state. Allow the existance of other political parties. Hold free elections. Until these acts happen, Cuba is just another repressive government we don't want to read about on slashdot.

      Let's see:

      • Free the political prisoners: I assume you mean the political prisoners sitting in the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, operated in Cuba by the United States of America.
      • Free the press: This one is quite important. Having most of the news in one country owned by one corporation/person (News Corp/Rupert Murdoch) is never good.
      • Allow criticism of the state: I completely agree here. It's very important that you don't let the government add regulations to force bloggers to register, etc.
      • Allow the existance of other political parties: Yes. Two more or less identical parties is much better than one.
      • Hold free elections: Indeed. A democracy that doesn't let for example women, black people, or prisoners vote, is just a joke.
      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    10. Re:Yawn... by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 1

      Cuba has been holding elections for a long time. Just because the "free" press in the united states doesn't talk about it, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    11. Re:Yawn... by polar+red · · Score: 1

      >political prisoners
      yeah, those guys in Guantanamo bay are being tortured, those aren't just political prisoners.

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    12. Re:Yawn... by hey! · · Score: 1

      I agree, the individual in charge is really not all that important. But people acting as if that individual were important -- that's important.

      Demonizing Castro has only propped up his regime. Having a hostile superpower 90 miles from his shores, one that orchestrated a failed invasion and which continues to take petty, ineffective symbolic actions against him has been practically the best possible thing for his regime. Dissatisfaction is human nature, but as long as there is a "clear and present danger" it can be blunted and turned away from the regime, and harsh policies against dissent have a ready excuse.

      It's no accident that the Soviet Union fell during an diplomatic era of "detente" (understanding) and "glasnost" (openness).

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    13. Re:Yawn... by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      Lets not forget that the entire base is build on illegal ground, and Cuba want it back!

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    14. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is claiming the USA is perfect, but complaining about our lack of freedom is insulting to the oppressed people of Cuba. Why don't you just compare President Bush to Hitler while you're at it?

    15. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1
      Felt good criticizing your government, didn't it? In Cuba, a comment like that would have lost you your job & had a good chance of getting you locked up for 3-5 years as an enemy of the state. I've met people from cuba to whom this happened who then spent 10+ years finding a way to leave the country so that they could again appreciate the freedoms you have but do not understand.

      You, pipatron are the joke. Try living under a system where criticizing your governnment has the same penalties as in cuba. We'll see how much your tune changes when they release you from prison...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    16. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1, Troll

      Remind me how many US citizens are incarcerated in Guantanamo? Oh, thats right. There aren't any. As political prisoners are invariably citizens of the detaining state, that rules them out. Got any other terms you use that you don't know the meaning to that you would like clarified?

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    17. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course... You've grown up enjoying the freedoms that cubans under castro don't have, so it's hard for you to recognize them.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    18. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    19. Re:Yawn... by ChetOS.net · · Score: 1

      "without knowing which country you were talking about"

      So, I guess you just happened upon a single comment in this thread?

      Didn't you know which article you were looking at?

      --
      "If God had intended us to walk he would not have invented roller skates." -- Willy Wonka
    20. Re:Yawn... by smitth1276 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, those guys in Guantanamo bay are being tortured, those aren't just political prisoners.

      Yeah, not so much. Who has been spoon feeding you that crap?

    21. Re:Yawn... by polar+red · · Score: 1
      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    22. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      If I could, yes, I'd filter out all the US political stories that pop up on slashdot. What, your trite question wasn't earnest & you really had no interest in my reply!?!?

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    23. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that if you eanestly expessed the desire to emigrate to cuba & that you had anything to offer them that they would allow you to immigrate there. Let us all know how it turns out in 10 years or so after they let you out of prison for criticizing your new state as you have the liberty to do in the USA. I've met people here (note: Paris France, not the USA) who were imprisoned for years then emigrated for criticizing the cuban government, so you're not as funny as you think you are. Given that you posted as an AC, you're certainly not as brave as you think you are either.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    24. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      Does the word "free" before the word "elections" have any meaning for you?!?!

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    25. Re:Yawn... by wclacy · · Score: 1

      * Free the political prisoners: They are not political prisoners! Do you even know what a political prisoner is?
      * Free the press: The press is completely one sided, but this is in no way imposed by Government, and has everything to do with lazy journalism and almost all news stories coming from the associated press.
      * Allow criticism of the state: This is allowed. What country do you live in? There are no proposals to change this
      * Allow the existance of other political parties: There are more than 2 parties! Few people support them and so they are seen as nonexistent. If you want to change this you are free to do everything in your power to change it. Without other parties(I:Perot) Bill Clinton would have never been elected president.
      * Hold free elections: They are free, All Women and black people are allowed to vote. Prisoners have lost their rights by their own bad decisions.

      Your comments are yet another reason people shouldn't smoke dope.

    26. Re:Yawn... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      funnily enough, I read this much of your post without knowing which country you were talking about...

      Presuming you're referring to America:

      The term you're looking for is "irony", as in when you freely criticize the country that you claim does not allow free criticism.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    27. Re:Yawn... by uglydog · · Score: 1

      I think the point of the parent was that we are in no position to judge. And I would agree. I give two shits what Cuba is doing because I am in America. Cuba is not a threat. Cuba doesn't matter to us. Let them do what they want. Live and let live (or die as the case may be). The US is not the world's moral police.

      And the parent had a few valid points which you did not respond to. You just said we aren't as bad as Cuba. As a US citizen, that is no consolation.

    28. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/Cuba/USA/

      There, fixed that for you

    29. Re:Yawn... by tokul · · Score: 1

      Got any other terms you use that you don't know the meaning to that you would like clarified?

      How do you call people, who oppose some regime and are held in custody without trial or any respect to human rights by that regime? If Cuba frees political prisoners, will US do the same?

      How do you call long term economical sanctions placed by "friendly" neighbor on country that tried to reduce influence of that neighbor on country's economy and politics?

      If Cuba is the bad guy, then who is on other side?

    30. Re:Yawn... by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1
      Until these acts happen, Cuba is just another repressive government we don't want to read about on slashdot.

      ... He says, writing about it on Slashdot for others to read (and sparking a decent-sized subthread besides) ...

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    31. Re:Yawn... by LuisAnaya · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is in Cuba a pretty strong open source movement.

      --
      Vi havas e-poston.
    32. Re:Yawn... by wall0159 · · Score: 1

      "Presuming you're referring to America"

      You presume wrong. I wasn't referring to a particular country. To me it seemed like that part of the comment could refer to almost any Western country (sure, some bits more than others) and this struck me as rather sad.

      "The term you're looking for is "irony", as in when you freely criticize the country that you claim does not allow free criticism."
      Take it easy there. I don't think there are any countries on Earth that are so perfect that they are above criticism. Is that what you're trying to say?

      Look, living in the West is great. Freedom and democracy are wonderful. However, if we're not vigilant with them, we'll lose them. If someone criticizes a country, they're not necessarily saying 'everything about that country is crap,' but maybe they're pointing out that things could be better.

      As for the mods who modded me 'troll' - that's about as close to censorship as we get in the West. Well done - keep up the good fight for freedom!

    33. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      Consider it a plea for Taco et al to give us the tools to better filter subjects on slashdot. If I could configure /. to not show these dumb political stories you'd never see another like post from me ever again.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    34. Re:Yawn... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I don't think there are any countries on Earth that are so perfect that they are above criticism. Is that what you're trying to say?

      How did you get that from what I wrote? What I said was that in western societies - all western societies that I am aware of - people have the right to criticize and protest their governments. I always find it ironic when people complain that their country won't let them complain.

      As for the mods who modded me 'troll' - that's about as close to censorship as we get in the West.

      Yes, and it's wonderful! The worst consequence of your words is that some random visitor on a web forum disagrees with you. You won't be dragged out of your house and arrested in the middle of the night or have to watch your families get beaten. Ironically (there it is again!), your words are literally true when spoken un-ironically. Cool, huh?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    35. Re:Yawn... by wall0159 · · Score: 1

      "your words are literally true when spoken un-ironically" :-) I meant them without irony..

      Look, I think our positions are actually not so different on this. Maybe I'm a bit more likely to open my mouth and have a whinge about what are really fairly minor transgressions on our freedom. I want to keep them that way - any encroachment on our freedom needs to be nipped in the bud.

      Unfortunately there are a lot of people who, despite what they say, don't actually support freedom of speech for those with whom they disagree (to one degree or another). These people are dangerous.

      Anyway, vive la libre! (or however it's said ;-)

    36. Re:Yawn... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Why don't you just compare President Bush to Hitler while you're at it? In spite of you having invoked Godwin's Law, it has to be said. As Stephen Colbert reported about a year ago, Bush had reached or surpassed Hitler's lowest approval rating, about 30%. I imagine it's gone down a bit since then. Then there's the fact that Hitler actually did a few things useful for his country, such as mandate a vehicle that the average citizen could buy (the Volkswagen). Oh, and Hitler actually had control of one or two invaded countries for some period of time. I can't think of anything good that Bush has done, besides turn the US political stage from a 3 ring circus to a complete, very sad, joke.
      So, what does that sum up to? Hitler was somewhat more competent, and selected people for positions of importance based on their skills instead of cronyism. And Hitler was more evil. I'm sure Bush is proud.
      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    37. Re:Yawn... by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Why don't you just compare President Bush to Hitler while you're at it?

      Well, that wouldn't be fair, would it? Hitler, while being pure evil, also got the German economy on its feet, and invested highly in infrastructure... ;)

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    38. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1
      1: Illegal combattants if a term which describes the people in Guantanamo quite well to me. POW doesn't apply because it's clearly defined in the Geneva & other accords & they don't fit & as I said earlier PP doesn't either. If the term IC doesn't have enough negative connotations to please you, then that's your problem.

      2: Cuba's status wrt the US is in large part their own (Castro's) choice. When Krushchev considers you to be a loose cannon because you try to push him unto a nuclear war with the US, don't complain when the USA freezes you out every way they can. The USA & Cuba haven't been "friendy" since before that point & once Krushchev let the USA know just how nuts he is the door closed forever on "friendly" as long as Castro was in power. Read Krushchev's memoires for what should have been a complimentary picture of Castro, but was anything but.

      3: The Good guys are those that do everything I stated in my initial post. It doesn't have to be the USA or even US allies, but as it turns out, Good guys usually are, whereas if you take the time to look, Cuba under Castro hasn't been.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    39. Re:Yawn... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      In Communist Cuba, source opens you...

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    40. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      It's nice to see that "Free" as in beer is well understood in Cuba (seriously). Too bad "Free" as in Free to criticize the government or hold Free elections, etc isn't (even more seriously).

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    41. Re:Yawn... by leoc · · Score: 1

      Presumably you've been to Cuba so you know that those things are true objectively, and not learned through the US media? Or are you an American, who is forbidden upon penalty of law, to visit Cuba to find out for yourself?

      --
      STFU about slashdot bias.
    42. Re:Yawn... by tokul · · Score: 1

      1: Illegal combattants if a term which describes the people in Guantanamo quite well to me. POW doesn't apply because it's clearly defined in the Geneva & other accords & they don't fit & as I said earlier PP doesn't either. If the term IC doesn't have enough negative connotations to please you, then that's your problem.

      What makes them illegal? Person must violate the law in order to become illegal somebody. What law they are violating and is it proven in court?

      Why US is holding non-US citizens in custody

      Of cause they are not POWs. US would never admit that. They would have to follow Geneva accords, if these people were POWs.

      Cuba might not be the best side of world, but their opponent is not any better. I would like to see Cuba without communists, but I would like to see it without Gitmo too.

    43. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1
      Presumably, you know how to look up a /. users profile to see where I live & know how to find my comments elsewhere in this thread.

      Oh, sorry, I forgot that this is slashdot where people like you post before expending any effort...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    44. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no legal restriction to two parties. you'd be quite surprised about that if you looked closely at election laws. they do a good job of legally limiting it to 2 parties without doing so explicitly.

    45. Re:Yawn... by leoc · · Score: 1

      Nice little collection of ad hominems you put together there.

      The fact is, if you are American, then you are NOT free to visit Cuba and find out for yourself.

      --
      STFU about slashdot bias.
    46. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, let's discuss the computers made in Cuba. You go first.

      Not computers: pharmaceutical innovation

      I'd laugh to see the US stepping up to the WTO to enforce Cuban biomedical patents. But hey, enforcement of the proper ownership of the Bacardi trademark would be a start...
    47. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1
      Fact is, I don't need ad-hominems as you're a idiot too lazy to figure out that I don't have to use my US passport to visit Cuba.
      Tout le monde n'a pas qu'une seule passeporte et je me servirais de mon passeporte Français petit con.

      Now go away before I taunt you again...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    48. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1
      Many of the people in Gitmo are not afghanis either. Afghans or not, had they worn the uniform of a state while warring with the USA they would have been treated as POWs, as all members of the the Iraqi army under Sadaam were treated. Read the Geneva accords sometime, you'll discover that not anyone who picks up a gun during a war qualifies. Study the history of warfare & you'll discover that combatants such as those held in Gitmo were usually shot out of hand as spies.

      I could care less about the continued existence of a Cuban communist party. Communists can & have played valuable roles in democracies. It's the Cuban one party state & its oppression of any who dispute it that I oppose. Burma's ruling junta is no better.

      People who claim that Cuba & the USA are the same because they both have faults are fools.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    49. Re:Yawn... by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, 3.1 million people in the UK protest in London at the same time about not going to Iraq and the Blair does it anyway.

      Your perceived freedom means NOTHING! Governments just do what they want anyway.

    50. Re:Yawn... by phayes · · Score: 1

      How many were imprisoned for years after criticizing their government? You confuse making the government do whatever the majority (or a minority) wants with being able to criticize the government. The "NOTHING" you foolishly denigrate allows you to show your ignorance here on /. instead of spending it in prison.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  11. Those exploding cigars paid off! by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 1

    I can just hear the anti-Castro cold warriors crowing that their plans to remove him from power worked. So now what are the nut jobs in Miami going to bitch about?

    1. Re:Those exploding cigars paid off! by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      > what are they going to bitch about?

      Land Prices? Gas Prices? Foreign Wars? The stereotypically hot guys on CSI: Miami?

      -ellie

    2. Re:Those exploding cigars paid off! by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      So now what are the nut jobs in Miami going to bitch about?

      Taxes, and all the damn immigrants stealing their jobs. Same as the rest of us.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  12. I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by YojimboJango · · Score: 1, Troll

    From the article: "Eventually this transition ought to lead to free and fair elections. And I mean free, and I mean fair -- not these kinds of staged elections that the Castro brothers tried to foist off as being true democracy," Bush said, on the road in Rwanda. Anyone get the vibe that Bush is just jealous. I think the United States needs a few of these free and fair elections unlike the ones we've had for the last 8 years.

    1. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Cornwallis · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "I think the United States needs a few of these free and fair elections unlike the ones we've had for the last 8 years." Get over it loser. The system worked properly.

    2. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what they said in Cuba too.

    3. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Please. The system hasn't worked for a while; I'm not convienced that just the last two elections were rigged. Seeing what's going on now, it mostly looks like a farse.

    4. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhh, your going against group internet mindspeak!

      The funny thing is, it works the way it does BECAUSE of group mentality.

      No one is bitching because kennedy 'stole' the election from nixon. The system worked EXACTLY as it should then too.

    5. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by diamondsw · · Score: 1

      "Get over it loser. The system worked properly."

      Which is what scares me more...

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    6. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      The US election system hasn't worked anywhere close to "properly" for quite a while (if ever). That's not hard to back up, and denying the existence of the problems will only make things worse.

      What is more difficult is finding evidence of any "vast conspiracies" that have successfully changed the outcome of an election, but it is no stretch to say that election fraud and incompetence in its various forms have come close to tipping the scales.

    7. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced that just the last two elections were rigged. Seeing what's going on now, it mostly looks like a farce.

      Like he said, the system is working exactly as it was designed to work.
      Don't tell me you actually expected your vote to count for something?

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    8. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      When discussing if the system works, it helps to read the Constitution and associated documents before saying "it works as designed."

    9. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      When discussing if the system works, it helps to read the Constitution and associated documents before saying "it works as designed."

      The federal government does a lot of things that one could argue are outside the powers they were granted under the Constitution.

      However, we were talking about the electoral system, specifically the presidential electoral system, and I've never heard anyone claim that the current US electoral system works in a manner contrary to what was laid out in the Constitution. I mean, changes have been made since 1791 with the racial and women's suffrage, and the changes to the electoral college and the direct election of senators, but the presidential electoral system works as designed.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    10. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Its not the electoral system that's the problem; its the political party system. Many of our founders were leery of such organizations, and it seems they had good cause.

    11. Re:I couldn't help but post this amazing quote. by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      Its not the electoral system that's the problem; its the political party system. Many of our founders were leery of such organizations, and it seems they had good cause.

      Well sure, but the political party system has flourished under our electoral system because it works well in getting people elected. It may not be the way the founders intended it to work, but the design they laid down has followed to its logical conclusion, which is where we're at now.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
  13. Re:News For Nerds by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

    It means the return if the Cuban Bride business. We no longer have to suffer with the long shipping delays of the Russian bride business and now can get women to marry us sight un-seen in a few hours instead of a few months.

    Nerds everywhere are that much closer to being possibly able to touch a boobie.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  14. I for one.. by 4D6963 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I for one bid farewell to our communist Cuban dictator overlord.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  15. Idea by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The U.S. should make aggressive postures towards Cuba so that they are too scared to open their society and will look to a strong man for defense. Great idea, huh?

    1. Re:Idea by MrSteveSD · · Score: 4, Informative

      Exactly. When Castro met up with Che Guevara after the Guatemalan government was ousted, he wanted to know what happened. He couldn't believe that such a popular socialist (and democratic) government was overthrown. Guevara told him that the US had infiltrated the press and the unions and was spreading propaganda and stirring up trouble (which it was). Not surprisingly when Castro ousted the US-backed dictator Batista, he cracked down on the press and unions for fear of US infiltration. So the US taught an unfortunate lesson. i.e. If you have a government we don't like, and you have an open society, we will use that openness to attack and undermine your government.

      Now I don't approve of the Castro dictatorship, even though it is better than the US-backed Batista dictatorship. However, I acknowledge how difficult it would have been to have a socialist democracy in Cuba without the US subverting the whole thing very quickly. They almost succeeded quite recently in Venezuela during the failed coup in 2002 and they are also supporting opposition groups in Bolivia right now. The governments in Central and South America are really quite sick of the US trying to control them all of the time and there is a real backlash taking place.

    2. Re:Idea by gryf · · Score: 1

      Funny that a guy who has 'Democracy Now!' as his sig should respond to the news with a flippant accusation against the US rather than a statement supporting the poor people of Cuba who have no democracy. These same people who risk their lives swimming in rickety makeshift watercraft trying to reach the US to realize actual democracy.

      --

      #-#
      Ad Astra Per Aspera
      A rough road leads to the stars
    3. Re:Idea by jstypo · · Score: 1

      ...

      Now I don't approve of the Castro dictatorship, even though it is better than the US-backed Batista dictatorship. ... How can the word "better" fit in the same sentence where you mention replacing one evil bastard with another (please weight the evil bastard factor by the time in power factor). What on earth were you thinking?
    4. Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When one evil bastard has killed 10,000 but the other evil bastard has killed 100,000.

      Kinda like how the US is freer than North Korea so get off our backs....

    5. Re:Idea by svyyn · · Score: 1

      What does food cost there now? The lack of facts suggest that your argument is, in fact, baseless. Your offensiveness further suggests a desire to not be questioned, strengthening the assumption that your argument is baseless. Of course, actually backing up your argument and enlightening your audience is a lot more work than name calling.

    6. Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i suggest you rent the movie "Motorcyle diaries" (about the pre-reolutionary Che).

    7. Re:Idea by MrSteveSD · · Score: 1

      Better in the sense that Castro has the interests of Cuba at heart rather than those of the US and the Mafia.

    8. Re:Idea by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      The US has a very long history of invading countries, and undermining governments throughout the Caribbean, and Central and South America. The whole concept of Manifest Destiny more or less justifies any invasive or violent actions the US might take doesn't it (I mean in the opinion of those who make US policies). Internally you are a Republic (more or less), externally you have always been working on becoming an Empire I think.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    9. Re:Idea by The+New+Stan+Price · · Score: 0

      Collectivism must be coerced, it isn't natural. Free societies allow people to voluntarily live in a collectivist society (i.e. Communes), and I don't see a lot of people clamoring to live in those places. The ones that still survive have high turnover rates.

      I hear people say things like "real Communism would work if people just give it a chance." Of course, then there's the old "well, it can only work if everyone is Communist." The truth is that it destroys people. Even "Communist-lite" Europe would be in very bad shape if it weren't for the fact that they leach off of more Capitalist countries. (France sells their wine and cheese to wealthy Capitalists, for instance.)

      As far as subversion goes, it works both ways: Leftism has a foothold in all of our institutions (education, media, government) and they have learned to use political correctness and Orwellian lexicon to try to control people rather than physical coercion. Either way, it is coercion. Leftists love coercion.

    10. Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You are right. Food is pretty cheap...now, if only there was some to buy.

      Mr. Castro wanna be and his price controls have pretty much driven the market underground. The official prices can't support the costs of production. This means shortages. It's basic economic theory. Hugo's way has been tried again and again and it never works, Which, by the way, is the definition of insanity.

      If you want facts, fucking Google it you moron. I'm at work.

      And there's nothing offensive about calling Castro a murdering bastard.

    11. Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The governments in Central and South America are really quite sick of the US trying to control them all of the time and there is a real backlash taking place Mostly. Of course you've got the govts. of Colombia and Chile openly asslicking the Gringos, and given that half the congresistas grew up there, you expect that. But yes, on the whole, people are definately sick and tired of it all. If we did the sort of shit to the US that they've done to us...shit, if we just ignore the US...well, Cuba is a classic example isn't it? It's also been an inspiration to many - Chavez, Kirschner, Morales, the new gov of Nicaragua, and Lula, of course.

      So I say "mostly" because the inteligencia here realise that it's the US's continual droning on and on about how we should do things is doing EXACTLY what it's done in the Middle East.
    12. Re:Idea by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some might argue that an evil bastard that provides education, food, and health care to the entire population is better than one who sells out to foreign business interests and does nothing for the people. Castro is far from being a saint, but if I had to choose to be a peasant under Castro or Batista's regime, I know which one I'd pick.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    13. Re:Idea by mxs · · Score: 1

      The governments in Central and South America are really quite sick of the US trying to control them all of the time and there is a real backlash taking place. If you mean "wild posturing and empty rhetoric" by "real backlash" you may be right. Generally those governments are intelligent enough to be scared of the military countermeasures should there be a REAL backlash.
      They have a valid beef, but they won't invade the US for it. No sane regular government will do that, since it's quite hard to argue with 500 billion in defense spending.
    14. Re:Idea by Kattspya · · Score: 1

      Provides? What the fuck?

    15. Re:Idea by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

      Sorry, guess i should have said "The government over which he presides provides". Didn't mean to confuse you.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    16. Re:Idea by demachina · · Score: 1

      "Leftism has a foothold in all of our institutions"

      In case you didn't notice rightism has a foothold in all of those places too. You just hate Leftists so you notice them and choose to ignore the extremists on the other side you are OK with.

      The U.S. government was completely dominated by rightists from 2000 through 2006. They were just so horrible at governing people decided they hated the Democrats less.

      As for the media you need to look no further than Rupert Murdoch. He controls Fox, Fox News, CNET, DirectTV, MySpace, the Wall Street Journal, scores of newspapers and television stations and he is as right wing as they come. I think it is the largest media empire on the planet and it is entirely controlled by a right wing extremist. Talk radio is also dominated by nothing but right wing nuts.

      As for education I'll grant you American teachers do lean pretty strongly left though "No Child Left Behind" was the right wings best attempt to completely destroy the current education system. Unfortunately like everything they've tried in the last 7 years the right wing botched that too. They would certainly prefer all children were moved in to private, preferably religious schools.

      "Leftists love coercion."

      All people with a thirst for power love coercion, that is what power is, one person or group of people exerting control over another. Its not something unique to "Leftists". Rightists really love coercion too. Capitalists are quite familiar with coercion, its just the way they go about is somewhat more subtle. The ridiculous power big corporations and lobbyists have acquired over the U.S. government has almost completely disconnected the government from the actual people. The people keep voting for them and sending them to the halls of power. Once they get there they mostly vote the way lobbyists and their big campaign contributors tell them, which is usually diametrically opposed to the actual best interests of their constituents.

      --
      @de_machina
    17. Re:Idea by Kattspya · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I thought you were more or less insane initially.

    18. Re:Idea by The+New+Stan+Price · · Score: 0

      I'll give you Rupert and AM talk radio and raise you most of Hollywood, most major news papers (including the New York Times), PBS, NPR, Google, Yahoo, most of Silicon Valley, most of the major networks but Fox News, most of the Music Industry, the Universities, etc. Talk radio is really the only place we have to go to vent our frustration.

      No Child Left Behind was supported by Ted Kennedy and Democrats. It is not really a conservative solution. We like freedom of choice, something that Leftists seem to hate (except when it comes to abortion, sex, and drugs) because they fear losing their captive pupils.

      You are right that people with a thirst for power love coercion. While it is true that money and power rules, why do you think that it won't under your dream fantasy ideal world? Human nature will still be there. The only way to deal with it is to limit the size and power of government. Instead, leftists want to expand government. Imagine all that corruption AND a bigger more intrusive government! Our founders understood that humans are inherently evil. They set up our government with this in mind. This is why there are checks and balances and gridlock.

      The only thing that will change if your guy or gal gets the White House, besides the expanding of a corruptible government, is the press coverage, which will paint you a more rosy picture for a while and make you feel like things are better. You won't hear all those news stories meant to damage the current administration.

    19. Re:Idea by demachina · · Score: 1

      Lol, the concept there is a gigantic global leftist conspiracy is just flat goofy, considering there is less Socialism in the world today than there has been in the last hundred years. The world is increasingly dominated by plutocrats and people who mouth empty praises of free markets and then buy ourt politicians to give them huge barrels of pork. You need look no further than China, to see a supposedly leftist country that is now an extremely right wing Fascist state worshiping at the altar of the beloved buck.

      You are also jumping to the conclusion I'm a leftist since its your knee jerk reaction to make every discussion so your convenient off the shelf rants work. Not really a fan of Socialism either, just have no use for people who rant about it like its the root of all evil. The right wing and free marketeers aren't any better, or really any different.

      I would be a Libertarian but if you actually did that the top 1% and the ruthless dicks would devour the world and everyone else would end up dirt poor.

      Unfortunately once the human population exploded, the world got crowded, we started organizing societies and developing social systems we entered in to a realm in we get a bunch of incompetent self serving people whose goal in life is to order everyone else around no matter where they are on the spectrum,. Its just inevitable some people are going to spend their time telling other people how to live, and now there aren't even any frontiers left which is how people used to escape being bossed around by other people.

      I'm just pointing out there isn't really a dimes bit of difference between Socialist bureaucrats bossing everyone around, and wealthy capitalists doing the same thing. In capitalism the power lies in the hands of the ruthless rich who were willing to screw their own mother to get rich(er), and if you don't have any money you are going to be coerced every second of your life by the people who do.

      --
      @de_machina
    20. Re:Idea by The+New+Stan+Price · · Score: 0

      The world isn't that crowded out here in middle America. There is still land for a decent price, jobs, business opportunities, etc.

      That said:

      1. A purely leftist society still has rich people. The rich in leftist societies have even closer ties to government. Corruption exists in leftist society and government, just as in any place that has humans and human nature.

      2. A mostly free society, which of course must have a free market or it wouldn't be free, has rich people. Imagine that.

      One thing that I've noticed about Capitalist countries is that the majority of people aren't interested in starting their own business. They want to immediately get a job working for someone else, have kids, and start buying X-Boxes, big screen TVs, nice car, etc. Many don't even bother to get an education, or at least one in a field that is in demand. Now I hear them complaining because they aren't rich, never mind the fact that they live pretty well compared to their parents, who lived better than their grandparents, etc. (My grandparents lived in a Mill town, working for the wealthy Mill owner, living in the houses that he set up for them. They didn't have many choices, and were literally dirt poor.)

      So the rich are the ones that create the jobs that allow you to raise your children, buy your X-Box, buy your car, buy your house, etc. Who else is going to create those jobs that keep you working? The government? Some Collectivist coop? Whenever you take the incentive away, you take the jobs away. Fewer jobs means fewer opportunities. Fewer opportunities means more despair. You think your life is bad now?

  16. So, does this mean by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...we can finally end this sad old Cold War charade and finally end the damn embargo?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:So, does this mean by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      Probably not. NPR noted the embargo laws, notably the Helms Burton act, is in force while a Casto is in power. Fidel or Raul.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  17. He's already dead. by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fidel Castro is already dead. He's just resigning because his political duties get in the way of his lust for brains. BRAAAAAAAINS!!

    1. Re:He's already dead. by mrxak · · Score: 1

      Has anybody actually seen him since his operation anyway? Maybe he really is dead, and this announcement in the paper is just a cover?

    2. Re:He's already dead. by dsginter · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that Wikipedia link to the Zombie information. At first I didn't know what the hell you were talking about but then I read up on Zombies and their appetite for brains (BRAAAAAAINS!!) and I got a really good laugh.

      --
      More
    3. Re:He's already dead. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      I though he was going to move to his retirement home in Miami.

      It seems to be a popular place for cubans for some reason.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:He's already dead. by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Dude, you know wikipedia isn't accurate. If you want and article about zombies, go here.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    5. Re:He's already dead. by calebt3 · · Score: 1

      Respawn in 9...8...

    6. Re:He's already dead. by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      Has anybody actually seen him since his operation anyway? Maybe he really is dead, and this announcement in the paper is just a cover?

      I think he's dead for quite a while now, but the government is afraid that news of his death would put the entire country in sheer chaos (and maybe even civil war).

  18. If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iBod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Before corporate America invades, and it's Wendys, Burger King, McDonalds and Starbucks on every street in Habana.

    For those of you that have never been to Cuba, it really is a unique place.

    Not for much longer, I fear.

    1. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, I'd rather have the aforementioned fast food restaurants than hordes of military personnel with automatic weapons all over the place.

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere. The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles. The authoritarian presence. The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones. The many desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes.

      If you have truly been there, I cannot understand how or why you would think that American chain restaurants are somehow worse than the abject human misery that dominates that island.

      Cuba is the final testament to the failure of communism. Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light, especially with the renewed faith in this system amongst the poor of Latin America.

    2. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's a shame, too. Just a few more weeks and I think that communism thing would have finally taken off.

    3. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      completely agree.

      unique place, and beautiful people.
      I hope at least cuban spirit will remain and will not collapse under Starbucks and McDonalds omologation.

    4. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iBod · · Score: 0

      Get off your high horse pal.

      Yes I have been there many times. I don't see a lot of the BS you posted.

    5. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      If they want all that, who are we to preserve their "culture"? Maybe... just maybe they're tired of their "culture" due to communism all these generations.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      We have a family friend who spent 20 years in prison for passing out anti-Castro fliers. The first 3 years he was in solitary because he refused to give up the location of their presses.

      Once he got out, he went to Spain, where his father's family was from, and then to Florida after a few years. He skipped the Christmas party this year because he had talked earlier to his mother. She had money, but there was no food to buy with it.

      What's real and what they let you see are totally different. After all, there are many, many documents by the Red Cross from WW2 which could be considered "proof" that the Holocaust is all made up... just like Global Warming. But you wouldn't bite on that, would you?

      Didn't think so.

      Now kindly shut the fuck up and go and watch your Michael Moore DVDs again.

    7. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iminplaya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light, especially with the renewed faith in this system amongst the poor of Latin America.

      Yes, they can look up to Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, El Salvidor, Honduras, Guatemala, etc as a testament to the triumph and prosperity of capitalism and democracy.

      --
      What?
    8. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      Just like what happened to Iran after the Ayatollah Khomeini died. Sad.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    9. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never been to Cuba myself, but some of the stuff I've read at this website might possibly explain the differences in your accounts. The appearance of crumbling buildings (which the author of the website says only exist in Old Havana), people begging for food, dollars and medicine etc are apparently nothinig more than part of an elaborate tourist trap, designed to trick unsuspecting Americans into giving aid to those who don't want to work. Not that I would know personally, though.

    10. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cuba is the final testament to the failure of communism.

      Cuba is the final testament of the failure of commercial interventionism - USA embargo is also included here

    11. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by dpilot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Black and White comparisons are SOOOOO much fun, especially when each side thinks it's White and the other side is Black.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    12. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by daem0n1x · · Score: 0

      You're an astoturfer, and lying.

    13. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by ChibiOne · · Score: 1
      If they want all that, who are we to preserve their "culture"?

      I like good coffee. I also like tasty, broiled burgers. So do many others. Not Starbucks', not McD's.

      I don't recall wanting/asking for these fast-food chains to open in my city. Yet here they are. It wasn't the citizens wanting them, it was just one company's greed ("capitalism" you might say).

      Now I see Starbucks at every corner, while many damn good, traditional Mom and Pop coffee shops are closing.

      Having these chains open store in China, Cuba, Iraq, Rwanda... Sure, it represents free enterprise, but it doesn't automatically mean the population's desire of Freedom.

    14. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife and me visited the island a year ago and we didn't find such desperate situations you're depicting. I say we didn't find, perhaps it just because we only went to La Habana. Yes, there was poverty. And frustration. But not the misery my friends have seen in places like República Dominicana. Perhaps you should try to take off those free market eyeglasses and make a trip again along Cuba...

    15. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you apparently never left the Tourist Area. Congrats on being both blind and ignorant.

    16. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dont believe the hype.

      Cuba freed africa

    17. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason you haven't seen any of the stuff mentioned was that you were
      constrained to the tourist zones and that constraint was enforced by
      soldiers toting automatic weapons and a distaste for outsiders trying
      to see the truth.

      Next time you go down there, try stopping by Miami on your way back,
      and take a stroll down SW 8th Street, and talk to the refugees and their
      families waiting to be reunited FREELY with their relatives in Cuba.
      I'm sure you'll get a very different idea of what it's all about -
      they'll be delighted to hear how lovely you found downtown Havana to be.

      Either that, or move to Havana and stay there permanently. You'll find
      out just how wonderful the communist government is there; we won't hear about
      it, of course, because they won't let you casually log in to Slashdot and
      write an honest expose'... Assuming you could even afford the cost, given
      the thriving centrally-planned/managed economy down there.

    18. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by orzetto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When have you been in Cuba? I was there in the middle '90s (the periodo especial, when the economy was at its worst), and found out that most scaremongering about Cuba was just that—scaremongering. The news blabbered about continuous power outages, with electricity being available only a few hours a day. Funny enough, Havana's lights were on all night long (not just our hotel, the whole city).

      Personally, I'd rather have the aforementioned fast food restaurants than hordes of military personnel with automatic weapons all over the place.

      Never seen this kind of military presence. The only military I saw were at Matanzas airport (duh, fair enough), and three grunts (including one gruntess) marching on a country road that we drove by.

      The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles. The authoritarian presence.

      Funny, I saw no particularly crumbling buildings to speak of. No beggars either. People in Havana and elsewhere we travelled (from Pinár del Rio to Santa Clara) looked like they were not rich, but lived with dignity. Then again, a certain American subculture may consider any historically significant building as "crumbling"...

      The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones.

      Well, I for one did not receive any such warning. In fact we could go around freely. My father saw a street concert improvised by some locals in Havana, where the police intervened—lo and behold—to pick up broken bottles of beer so people would not hurt themselves.

      If you have truly been there, I cannot understand how or why you would think that American chain restaurants are somehow worse than the abject human misery that dominates that island.

      Have you truly been there, to pass that kind of judgements?

      The Bloqueo is America's version of the Berlin Wall. They tell you that it's against the enemy, while in fact what its ideators conceived it as a cultural divide, so idea would spread from Cuba to the mainland. Guess what would happen if someone made a movie about 9/11 rescue workers who cannot afford medical care in the US and get cured in the free-for-all Cuban system...

      Sure, Cuba has its share of problems: corruption, impediments to free speech, same leadership for too much time. However, looking at how these problems were tackled in the countries recently "liberated" by the US, I doubt the Cubans will be any better off with a US-sponsored regime change.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    19. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by aquatone282 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now I see Starbucks at every corner, while many damn good, traditional Mom and Pop coffee shops are closing.

      Then you failed to convince your fellow citizens to patronize Mom and Pop and to boycott Starbucks, because Starbucks (and McDonalds and Burger King, etc etc) would not last long if they were not making a profit and you don't make a profit unless you have patrons.

      The fact that other peoples' choices are not your choices does not make them any less valid. When a group of people begins to believe they know what's best for every one else you end up with a Cuba, a North Korea, a Saudi Arabia, you get my drift.

      You are free to get your coffee where ever you want - and that includes making it for yourself. Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to get their coffee at Starbucks.

      --
      What?
    20. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd rather have the aforementioned fast food restaurants than hordes of military personnel with automatic weapons all over the place. Luckily, at any noteworthy public event in New York, you get both nowadays.

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere. The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles. No doubt Communism contributes, but that kind of ignores the elephant in the room, a hostile US government that has spent years attempting to economically throttle it.

      The authoritarian presence. The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones. The many desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes. Strangely, as a Canadian, this is not too different from my sense of the US nowadays.

      If you have truly been there, I cannot understand how or why you would think that American chain restaurants are somehow worse than the abject human misery that dominates that island. I suppose some people find the world to be a better place, even with all its misery, when it's not an uptight shopping mall.

      Cuba is the final testament to the failure of communism. Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light, especially with the renewed faith in this system amongst the poor of Latin America. As the election of Daniel Ortega demonstrated? Or the massive popularity of Chavez?
    21. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Applekid · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yes I have been there many times. I don't see a lot of the BS you posted. Mostly likely, as a tourist, you stayed in tourist areas. None of the places where you would need a resident's card to get into, which, conveniently, are these unkept slums of poverty. You probably stayed in a nice hotel with electricity, air conditioning, and internet access. Internet access alone is enough to get the common Cuban without the luxury of being in the designated front-of-stage areas thrown in jail. A few blocks down the road you probably had a grocery store filled with just about every item you could want, like in any industrialized nation's grocery store. But you didn't have to carry your ration card, and you didn't have to choose between either canned meat or toilet paper. If you got sick you probably had an excellent hospital waiting for you with private rooms and the skilled doctors and the latest in technologies, not the crumbling biological dumps where they can barely keep the bathrooms clean and the only anti-biotic they have is pennicillin.

      The Castro regime tells the poor citizenry that the US embargo is why they suffer, yet for tourists armed with US dollars and Euros, it's nothing but the finest from the shining jewel of the caribbean.

      Next time you're there, and you're in private with a local, ask about where their family is from and where they grew up. Build a rapport and then ask about them about the real cuba, not what the travel agent will tell you. If you're feeling inquisitive, give them a camera phone and ask them to take some snapshots and bring it back to you. You'll be surprised what you'll see off the beaten path of the Michael Moore tour.

      You don't have to believe either me or parent. Just look at the evidence: if things are so wonderful in Cuba, why would people risk life and limb on barely seaworthy makeshift rafts through shark infested waters just to grab a clumpful of US soil? Are these the actions of citizens of nation that's not really all that bad off?
      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    22. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Yes, those "free elections" in those places are certainly the paragon of democracy! And nothing like having to pay all those bribes each and every month to keep your business open to spur that capitalism.

      None on your list are democracies OR capitalistic.

      Look to Chile, or Peru, or Columbia, or Belize, or Costa Rica if you want to see the results of democracy and capitalism in central and south America. Your list is a really good list of fascist and/or oligarchies with virtual control over all aspects of life.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    23. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Yes, they can look up to Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, El Salvidor, Honduras, Guatemala, etc as a testament to the triumph and prosperity of capitalism and democracy."

      Funny, the last 5 you list seem to be doing OK now. They all went through a really bad patch where no one acquitted themselves very well - both the US backed governments and "communist insurgencies", or vice-versa - committed plenty of atrocities. But they seem to have moved past it, and are functioning OK.

      As for Haiti, it was, is, and possibly always will be a shithole. They have always been run by strongmen, except for that brief moment when Aristide pretended to be democratic - you know, right before the US reinstalled him in power.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    24. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Mesa+MIke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I don't recall wanting/asking for these
      > fast-food chains to open in my city.
      > Yet here they are. It wasn't the citizens
      > wanting them, it was just one company's
      > greed ("capitalism" you might say).

      If the citizens didn't want them there, they would
      probably go out of business for lack of customers.
      Apparently enough of the citizens want them there that they can keep their doors open.

      Or are these greedy companies forcing the citizenry to be customers at gunpoint?

    25. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by zaphle · · Score: 1

      "The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles. The authoritarian presence. The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones. The many desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes."

      Things the USA has as well as Cuba:
      crumbling buildings - check
      authoritarian presence - check
      warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones - check
      desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes - check

      Your point being?

      --
      And what if there's nothing behind the door until it is being opened?
    26. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, that's kind of the point I'm making. Those countries I mentioned aren't very democratic and Cuba certainly isn't communist. They all are for the most part authoritarian dictatorships. A nice shade of gray. A very dark gray.

      --
      What?
    27. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by tokul · · Score: 1

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere.

      Are you sure that it is not caused by US embargo?

    28. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere.

      Communism caused the alleged destruction? Did you hear that on FOX News?

    29. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Are you sure that the destruction is caused by communism itself, and not the US sanctions that result from that?

    30. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      None on your list are democracies OR capitalistic.

      I understand that. And Cuba is not communist. So When people speak of the "failure" of communism, I need to remind them that no one has implemented true communism, so it's impossible to say whether it's a failure or not. Cuba is an example of the failure of fascist authoritarianism.

      --
      What?
    31. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by dajak · · Score: 1

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere. The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles. The authoritarian presence. The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones. The many desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes.

      Unique? Is neighbour Haiti any better off? It has half the GDP per capita, even though it has been ruled by the US and capitalism-friendly dictators since 1915.

      Is communism the sine qua non cause of Cuba being poor? What about decades of economic blockade, the collapse of sponsor the Soviet Union, scarce natural resources, etc.

      When Cuba was still a fairly wealthy colony sugar was a very expensive commodity. 21st century Cuba cannot run on sugar and tobacco.

    32. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iBod · · Score: 1

      >>The reason you haven't seen any of the stuff mentioned was that you were
      constrained to the tourist zones

      Boy you make some fucking big assumptions don't you?

      You assume a) I'm an American and b) I was a Tourist.

      WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS.

      My time in Cuba was spent as a contractor for a large (non-US) energy company. I could go anywhere I wanted. Or at least nobody told me otherwise, and nobody challenged me and asked for 'papers' and shit.

      Have you ever been there? Really?

      Keep on drinking your USA propoganda Kool-aid.

    33. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Abreu · · Score: 1

      The "destruction so apparent everywhere" was caused by the US Embargo, not by communism.

      And I really doubt you have been contacted by a Cuban mother offering you her daughter as a prostitute, so quit repeating Faux News crap.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    34. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by sykopomp · · Score: 1

      Really, now...

      Denying the effects of the embargo on the island just makes you look like an ignorant moron.

      Here's a news flash for you, though: Pretty much any place in the Caribbean is in pretty shitty condition. I was born and raised in Puerto Rico, a heavily capitalist US territory. The fact of the matter, though, is that when you leave the really nice touristy and/or metropolitan areas, the place is generally a shithole. There is much more to it than just 'ZOMG THERE IS A DICKTAYTOR AND HE IS COMMIE'. Hell, I'm more than comfortable blaming most of the troubles that Cuba (and most of Latin America's current troubles) on US imperialism and general involvement/abuse.

    35. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      ...no one has implemented true communism, so it's impossible to say whether it's a failure or not. The fact that no one has implemented a true communism (in any scale above a village) is a good indicator that communism is a failure. If you do a little thought experiment, you'll determine that true communism relies on the altruism of the vast majority of its participants. That's an unlikely event given my observations of humanity. True capitalism penalizes laziness and rewards greed. Hell, that's the definition of a regular lottery ticket buyer - someone who's rather lazy and rather greedy. And while true, unfettered, capitalism has its flaws (and they're about as big as communism's), it does have the advantage of working better with the psyche of the typical person.
      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    36. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The crumbling buildings
      You mean like the slum areas of most American cities?

      The antiquated automobiles
      You mean like the slum areas of most American cities?

      The warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones.
      You mean like how they tell tourists to avoid the slum areas of most American cities and stay in the "tourist" areas?

      The many desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes
      You mean like the slum areas of most American cities?

      American chain restaurants are somehow worse than the abject human misery that dominates that island
      Jesus Christ man, they are poor. Being poor is not synonymous with suffering. Not being able to buy a Big Whopper is not suffering.

      Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light,
      You can say that about the US now. Or is government sanctioned monitoring of it's citizens only applicable when it occurs in countries besides the US?

    37. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by 0111+1110 · · Score: 5, Informative

      None of the places where you would need a resident's card to get into, It is painfully obvious you have never been to the island. You don't have the slightest fucking clue what you are talking about. There is no such 'resident' card and no such restricted areas. I'm not sure there is anything that could be called a 'slum' in Cuba either. The nice/rich areas like Miramar and (to a lesser extent) parts of Vedado are the exception. Otherwise most of the housing in Cuba is pretty similar.

      I'm not even going to respond to the rest of your post. You are so far beyond clueless I cannot believe you recieved a +5 moderation. I don't think there is even one sentence in your entire post that is not completely wrong. Just a heads up to anyone reading that. I lived there for 14 months. I know what I am talking about and every single statement that applekid has made is factually incorrect. He knows absolutely nothing about the place. When you don't know anything about a topic how about it if you just STFU instead of spreading misinformation. Try talking about something about which you actually have a clue.
      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    38. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by phayes · · Score: 1

      Ah, A tourist who presumes "to have seen the real cuba". I'll believe the Cuban expats I've met who grew up there then spent time in jail for asking for free elections over a tourist who saw what he was allowed to see.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    39. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by ahaile · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I've lived in Cuba for well over a year, all combined, as my wife is a Cuban researcher. A lot of what you're writing here is just plain FUD. Let me see if I can clear a bit up:

      Mostly likely, as a tourist, you stayed in tourist areas. None of the places where you would need a resident's card to get into, which, conveniently, are these unkept slums of poverty.


      There are NO parts of Cuba where foreigners are not allowed. Just because you may have chosen to stay in the tourist zones doesn't mean you had to. There are no entry checks for residency cards (carnets) to get into the slums. You want to go there, fine, go there. I lived in Cerro, one of Havana's "zonas marginales" -- marginal, aka impoverished areas -- for over a year. The opposite, however, is true: there are places in Cuba, like the main tourist beaches of Varadero, where foreigners are allowed but Cubans without tourist jobs are excluded.

      Internet access alone is enough to get the common Cuban without the luxury of being in the designated front-of-stage areas thrown in jail.


      Yes and no. It's true that internet access is shamefully restricted in Cuba. So Cubans do what they've always done, they rely on friends and family to get around the barriers. Those who have access (like I did, though it cost me plenty) got to play mailman: every time I dialed in, I had several messages to send out and several to receive for the people I knew.

      A few blocks down the road you probably had a grocery store filled with just about every item you could want, like in any industrialized nation's grocery store.


      Nope. I did most of my shopping at the agropecuario, the same farmer's market that Cubans use. Except for rum. Domestic (peso) rum was awful. And the export-quality (dollar) rum was sooooo good.

      If you got sick you probably had an excellent hospital waiting for you with private rooms and the skilled doctors and the latest in technologies, not the crumbling biological dumps where they can barely keep the bathrooms clean and the only anti-biotic they have is pennicillin.


      Wow that's off base. I caught an eye infection while in Cuba and had to have minor eye surgery. I didn't go to the tourist hospital (Clinica Cira Garcia, the one in Michael Moore's film), I went to the national one. The doctor was very professional, the clinic was clean, the medications were current. After I came back to the US I had follow-up with a local doctor and he concurred with the treatment I'd been given. Official cost to me: 0. Actual cost to me: $20. Being an American, with the resources I had and knowing what it would have cost me in the US, I just couldn't leave without giving the doctor something. So I gave her $20. She was embarrassed but took it. My Cuban hosts understood but thought I should have given only $10.
    40. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by phayes · · Score: 1

      The high level of heath care in Cuba is the revolution's greatest achievement. My issues with Cuba are elsewhere in the governments denial of basic liberties.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    41. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, there is havana and then there is cuba.
      Second there is cuba for tourists and then there is cuba for cubans.

      Did you leave havana? Even santiago the second biggest city is already very different. Things ARE falling apart. Cars, houses, infrastructure. But with one point i agree. there are almost no beggars. That is true. Probably because one of the few good things i saw of the cuban version of communism is that the government WILL provide you with the means for the most meager of existence, but never the less. an existence. but read on. because that is not the end of the story.

      Did you notice the different colored number plates on cars? Did you notice how the nice ones all have blue (for tourists) or (black?) for government? and the rest are incredibly crappy old run down cars. How it is illegal to buy, sell, import or even give a car to a cuban. (But they may own them...)

      When you were there did you stay at a cubans house or in a nice hotel? Did you notice how no cubans may stay in those hotels? You say you were never restricted. You don't get it. The restrictions are mainly on the LOCALS! not on the foreigners! I ended up going to "cuban" beaches with my friends because they could not come to "mine". We ended up not going to seeing the carnaval in santiago because we were not aloud to sit in the same sections and so i refused to give in to the segregation. We were constantly pulled over by the police when ever in a car my cuban friends subjected to alot of unpleasent questions and suspicion because they weren't aloud in cars with blue plates and I wasn't supposed to be with them in cars with yellow plates. We had to get special permission from the local government in santiago just so that i was aloud to stay at their home while i was visiting. we had to prove (fake) that i was a remember of the family (or about to marry in).

      When you were there did you go to a lovely beach resort for foreigners or a beach for cubans? see the difference?

      When you were there did you ask a cuban why they do not just leave there country and emigrate somewhere else? Why they do not travel period! Do you know what it is like to live under a total travel ban?

      To this very day my friend in santiago has constant power outages. At the moment they have not had running water for several weeks and are collecting rain water. The only "internet" available to almost all cubans is email. And that is filter. (Look through the header sometime when you get an email from cuba. there's some pretty interesting stuff in there. sometimes the scanning software leaves trails.)

      Did you ask any cubans which do not deal with foreigners how much they earn? my friends family consists of 2 PhDs and a Master all in technical fields and each working in their fields as well as a second job at night. together the 3 of them earn 45 USD a month. and no. even in cuba that is not enough to keep food on the table for a 3 person family, let alone live a halfway decent life with a maybe even an luxuries here or there. In fact they are forced to rely on government food rations.

      Now these are things I KNOW are true. I have been there and seen these things with my own eyes. Notice i did not refer to anything abstract here. No mention of tons of secret police, claims of a repressive regime etc (which might all still be true). But these are all facts i have verified _in person_ not more then 2 years ago.

      Believe me i'm no fan of mcdonalds or starbucks or whatever. I haven't been in years as a matter of principle. But i'm DEFINITELY even less a fan of what i saw in cuba. this was one of the most depressing trips of my life (though i was absolutely charmed by the people i met.) Never the less the state of cuba is in shambles. Especially if your a cuban, not in havanna and don't work for the military , government or with tourists.

    42. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by phayes · · Score: 1

      The big time sleazeball son of my mother's third husband (yeah, my family is complicated) went to Cuba for that very reason. "Fortunately", he took pictures which were found on his way out of Cuba & he got to spend 5 years as a guest of the state (he could have rotted there for all I care). The mothers offering their kids is almost always an exageration but has happened. The organized child prostitution by other members of the extended family isn't (unfortunately).

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    43. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by blahtree · · Score: 2, Funny

      I spent 3 weeks cycling around Cuba in 2004 (I'm a Canadian). I went well off the beaten track, staying with families and camping. I saw many things that most visitors to Cuba never see.

      In my opinion, the focus on the welfare of the people is a red herring. People are provided for. They have food, shelter, health care, and education. No one is desperate. Resources are scarce, no thanks to the embargo, but people make do. Nobody prostitutes themselves because they have to.

      The real issue is the friction that an influx of foreign money creates between Cubans. Anyone who has contact with tourists (taxi drivers, waitresses, etc.) is rich. A $2 tip when the average wage is $15 a month is huge. Professionals such as lawyers, doctors, and software engineers by contrast are poor. This breeds a lot of suspicion, envy and distrust. Tourists are alternately welcomed with open arms or despised.

      It's a complicated country.

    44. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by tom's+a-cold · · Score: 1

      Cuba is only unique in that the destruction caused by communism is so apparent everywhere. The crumbling buildings. The antiquated automobiles.
      And none of that has anything to do with that embargo, right?

      And what are Cuba's life expectancy and infant mortality rates compared to other Central American or Caribbean countries that did not suffer the "destruction caused by communism"? Say, Guatemala or Haiti? Or, for that matter, that larger banana republic to the north with its own strutting tinpot dictator, the US?

      By the way, I don't like communism either. I'm anti-authoritarian. It's just that, when a lot of Americans start going on about "free markets," what they really mean is "imperialism managed by multinationals." And that's even worse than the Cuban system, since none of it is even nominally for the benefit of the people. Given the choice between rule by nosy, pushy social-worker types and domination by a kleptocratic ruling class, my first choice would be neither. But if that's not an available option, I would look closely at which would be less bad, and it's not obvious that, say, the Nicaraguan or Panamanian model is better than that of Cuba.

      --
      Get your teeth into a small slice: the cake of liberty
    45. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      From talking to people who've visited the non-tourist areas of the island (outside of Havana), and talking to Cuban visitors to the US, things are tough at times but definitely livable.

      Some major improvements over pre-Castro Cuba were in education and health care. Since the Soviet food supplies have been cut off, there is a lot more subsistence farming going on, and restrictions on selling surplus food have been relaxed. The people were not noticeably over- or under-weight, and appeared to be relatively healthy.

      There's definitely political repression, but it's not a complete police state either. People made jokes at Castro's expense among family and friends, but wouldn't do that out in public, for instance.

      In other words, it's not an island paradise or utopia, but it's far better than many other countries in the area are doing.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    46. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by STrinity · · Score: 1

      Things the USA has as well as Cuba: warning to tourists to stay in designated tourist zones - check desperate women offering their daughters as prostitutes - check
      Cite proof or retract.
      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    47. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      In my opinion, the focus on the welfare of the people is a red herring. People are provided for. They have food, shelter, health care, and education. No one is desperate. Resources are scarce, no thanks to the embargo, but people make do. Nobody prostitutes themselves because they have to.
      While I agree with the rest of your post, why blame the embargo for lack of resources? Most resources like food, clothing, oil, and raw materials are commodity items. If someone won't sell them to you, you can just buy them from someone else. Heck, aside from food (whose cost is subsidized by the U.S.), you're probably better off buying them from someone else instead of the expensive U.S. I can see blaming the embargo for the lack of manufactured goods like American cars, but blaming it for lack of resources is silly. If lack of resources are a problem, the most likely culprit is Cuba's economic policies leading to a non-functional economy, not the embargo.
    48. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by blahtree · · Score: 1

      It is my understanding that ships that dock at Cuban ports are not allowed to dock at US ports for 6 months afterwards. This makes it difficult for other countries to trade with Cuba and still do business with the US.

    49. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      After all, there are many, many documents by the Red Cross from WW2 which could be considered "proof" that the Holocaust is all made up...just like Global Warming.. But you wouldn't bite on that, would you? I wouldn't bite on either the holocaust denial or GW denial. But I will bite on those off-topic, trollish remarks. There happens to be many, many, many MORE documents, which are proof (no quotes needed) that the holocaust did in fact happen. And scientists have measured the temperature of this planet, and it is, in fact, warming, and most of them agree that humans aren't helping the situation. You can argue the role that humans play in Global Warming but to say it was made up is almost as insane as saying the holocaust was faked.

      Let me guess. You also believe the moon landing was faked and that 9/11 was an inside job.
    50. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light, especially with the renewed faith in this system amongst the poor of Latin America.

      Yes, they can look up to Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, El Salvidor, Honduras, Guatemala, etc as a testament to the triumph and prosperity of capitalism and democracy.

      Out of curiosity, I looked up the per capita GDP of all the independent nations I could find surrounding Cuba. Most seemed to be some form of democracy, although I'll leave it up to the reader to determine exactly which ones (just scroll up to the government section of the linked pages). Also, not all economic data is from the same year, but this should at least give you a ballpark estimate of where the countries stand. All figures from the CIA World Factbook, which despite the source seems to be generally regarded as a high quality compilation of facts. Here they are:

      United States - $46,000
      The Bahamas - $22,700
      Aruba - $21,800
      Trinidad and Tobango- $21,700
      Barbados - $19,700
      Netherlands Antilles - $16,000
      Costa Rica - $13,500
      Venezuela - $12,800
      Mexico - $12,500
      Antigua and Barbuda - $10,900
      Dominican Republic - $9200
      Panama - $9000
      Belize - $7800
      Colombia - $7200
      Guatemala - $5400
      El Salvador - $5200
      Jamaica - $4800
      Cuba - $4500
      Grenada - $3900
      Honduras - $3300
      Nicaragua - $3200
      Haiti - $1900

      So compared to all its neighbors, not just a handpicked list, Cuba seems to be doing rather poorly.

    51. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I was thinking of Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil

    52. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      Luckily, at any noteworthy public event in New York, you get both nowadays.

      Sorry, I live and work in New York City. The only time I see military type personnel are at train stations and the airport.

      No doubt Communism contributes, but that kind of ignores the elephant in the room, a hostile US government that has spent years attempting to economically throttle it.

      Are you trying to tell me that there isn't enough rock on that island for their 11 million citizens to rebuild buildings over a 40-year timespan? Cuba doesn't need the US anymore than the US needs Cuba.

      Strangely, as a Canadian, this is not too different from my sense of the US nowadays.

      You obviously haven't been here, ever. That said, I go to Montreal to get my cheap hookers. Those beautiful french girls from the countryside sell their bodies for dirt cheap. Here in New York City, it's either $2K an hour model type call girls or crack whores.

      I suppose some people find the world to be a better place, even with all its misery, when it's not an uptight shopping mall.

      I really think most people will agree that a shopping mall, no matter where it is, cannot accurately be called uptight in comparison with a country that executes its citizens for criticizing the government or calling for free elections. There really is no comparison.

      As the election of Daniel Ortega demonstrated? Or the massive popularity of Chavez?

      Chavez is only popular in the minds of liberal intellectual types. Those who live under his thumb don't completely agree with you.

    53. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by dwye · · Score: 1

      > Freeing the country will do wonders to bring the truth to light,

      What are you talking (well, writing) about? Raul Castro is taking over from Fidel. That is, the brother who was a communist before Che, let alone Fidel, and has been quietly competant at his job, rather than a noisy failure (like Che) is taking over, now.

      The best analogy that I can think up is that in this case, Felix Dzerzhinsky will take over from Stalin.

    54. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      I fail to see what the US has that is so necessary for such a large island of 11 million people.

    55. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because they say they're a democracy doesn't make it so.

      Every instance of Communism has been a failure. Every single one. Yet, people still grasp onto it for some reason. And it's always the people that never had to live under that system. Just more "do as I say, not as I do".

    56. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by lacyfaire · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we need more countries where the people are so desperately sheltered from competition that they offer to trade pants with you, twice in 1 week. Oh yeah, and why don't doctors in America drive cabs as second jobs? Go see it now folks, you're going to miss out!

    57. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      I don't recall wanting/asking for these fast-food chains to open in my city. Yet here they are. It wasn't the citizens wanting them, it was just one company's greed ("capitalism" you might say).
      Yes, because the capital needed to build all those shops just materialized out of the pure greed ore that Starbucks and McD's mined out of the earth!

      Give me a break! Just because you didn't want fast-food chains in your city doesn't mean that most everyone else in the city didn't. The chains stay open somehow, and I'll give you a hint: It's because people keep giving them their money!
    58. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You poor sad little dupe. And why is there such misery and poverty? 50 years of American bullying and punitive trade sanctions.

    59. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Maybe the blockades have something to do with that?* Not much, but some. Being a little island might, also. Check out what was going on in 1960. Pretty easy to see why he jumped to the other side. They don't harbor secret bank accounts the way those islands near the top do, at least not of the quantity of the others. Money laundering and contraband running havens they are. How else are you going to toss around that kind of money? I an surprised to see Panama so low. Must be some heavy corruption there still. Either way, Castro was no worse than Batista... depending on your POV. They were both murderers.

      *I truly believe he would have fallen much sooner if it wasn't for those blockades and attempted overthrows. Those things rarely have the desired effect, unless you're in the coffin making business.

      --
      What?
    60. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's some pretty wild propaganda there buddy. I sincerely doubt that you've ever been any closer than a right wing magazine description of the place (of course you don't actually claim that you've been there). Quite frankly, your description sounds much closer to New York, NY than it does to any city, town or village that I've been to in Cuba. It certainly isn't perfect, but I've yet to see anywhere in the world that is, but your description is an outright fraud.

    61. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Nulukkhizdin · · Score: 1

      Just don't bother to mention that Cuba is under US trade embargo.

    62. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      You're right, those countries are not good examples of the triumph of capitalism and democracy--because they don't have those, there.  They just aren't communist.

      They are corrupt and authoritarian--which is why they don't work.  And communism inevitably has the same issues, which is why it will never, ever work.

    63. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps it's because America is hardly a good example to follow? Just look at all the school shootings and general violence. Not to mention the materialistic attitude and such things as a lack of public health care. How can you say with a strait face that American culture and society is superior to Cuba? This doesn't excuse all the bad things that happen in Cuba, but to think that America must have a superior way of living is naive. But hey, what else would you expect from someone who thinks these complex, interwoven problems boil down to some single, big, simple problem, such as actually believing in strict capitalism vs. communism ideologies?

    64. Re:If you want to see the real Cuba, go now... by MochaMan · · Score: 1

      There are definitely crumbling buildings in Havana. That said, I agree, Cuba is a very unique experience, and well worth visiting. When the embargo ends one day, it'll be a vastly different country. I'm not convinced it'll be better or worse, just very different.

  19. Re:News for Nerds by SQLGuru · · Score: 0, Troll

    It is for Cuban nerds (not me).....maybe now they can get some decent hardware.

    Layne

  20. he must be resigning so that ... by mbaGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    he can spend more time on /. - searching for the "stuff that matters" perspective ;-)

    this is news, but not really BIG news - Fidel has been sick for a long time and his brother ("Raul") is going to "take over" (although there will be an "election")

    "ah come on, we all knew this socialism thing wasn't going to work"
    Fidel Castro via the Simpsons

    --
    It ain't what they call you. It's what you answer to. http://mylyceum.us/
    1. Re:he must be resigning so that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're gonna quote that episode, don't leave out the funniest lines:

      Fidel Castro: "The Americans aren't so bad, they named a street after me in San Francisco."
      [An aide whispers in Castro's ear]
      Fidel Castro: "It's full of WHAT?"

  21. Re:Shave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is he going to shave that horrible beard off as well? That's no way to talk about his lovely wife!
  22. irony? by DMoylan · · Score: 3, Funny

    is that the symbol for this story is a crown. or would that be goldy?

  23. Google by LM741N · · Score: 1

    announces new data center in Havana.

    1. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      already did somehow. www.google.com.cu

  24. Re:News For Nerds by servo335 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If there is a democratic election the Us will send them money and support. Think of all the work for Geeks that will open up....

  25. End of Washington's terror? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this will spell the end of Washington's systematic, decades-old state-sponsored terror campaign in Cuba. Nah, who am I kidding?

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article132624.html

  26. Like fahter like son? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this news for Cuba?, Isn't this Raul like his father ?
      Another Dick tator ?

    1. Re:Like fahter like son? by Wolvie+MkM · · Score: 1

      I don't recall what their father was like since Fidel is Raul's BROTHER.

      --
      I Like Pie...
  27. And old revolutionary, a new revolution by Eukariote · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ironic, an old revolutionary retires while a new revolution is pending over in the US. He may yet live to see it: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7191570287261358564.

    Was Castro a force for good? Maybe at first, but he soon became rather autocratic. Cuba is better off without him.

  28. Ana Menendez story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ana Menendez wrote a book titled "In Cuba I Was a German Shepherd". There was a bit in that book where future Cubans were discussing politics from the perspective of a resurrected Bill Clinton talking to a person on the street in America.

    Bill: How are things in Northern Ireland?

    Person: There no longer is a Northern Ireland, they worked all that out years ago!

    Bill: How about the Israel - Palestine conflict?

    Person: That's been solved, and there is peace in the middle east.

    Bill: What about the Koreas?

    Person: The Koreas have now long been united under a single Democratic system.

    Bill: And what about Cuba?

    Person: I can feel it in my bones, any day now Castro is going to fall!

  29. Cuba is not real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    More like a commie disneyland.

    The government doesn't represent the wishes of the people anymore than Batista's nonsense.

    Cuba wasn't meant to be a quaint backwater for turistas to see vintage automobiles.

  30. Wow, did he burn through the by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    1 trillion dollar bill THAT fast? I knew the value of the dollar was tanking, but I thought that trillion could have kept him going a little longer.

  31. Real or staged Cuba? by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you go now you will still be mostly confined to the "staged" Cuba, the Cuba presented to foreigners where the government needs to keep up appearances. If you want to see the real Cuba your going to either have to take risks or wait till the government collapses.

    Castro and his ilk did far more damage to Cuba than any corporate entity could manage, let alone get away with. His country started falling apart once it was no longer propped up by the Soviets. He is a study in the strength of personality and use of tactics similar to East Germany to maintain power

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Real or staged Cuba? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
      Castro and his ilk did far more damage to Cuba than any corporate entity could manage, let alone get away with ...

      So, does the name Haliburton mean nothing to you?

      --
      politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    2. Re:Real or staged Cuba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you go now you will still be mostly confined to the "staged" Cuba, the Cuba presented to foreigners where the government needs to keep up appearances. If you want to see the real Cuba your going to either have to take risks or wait till the government collapses.

      Have you ever been to the "real Philadelphia" or just visited the Liberty Bell?

    3. Re:Real or staged Cuba? by ahaile · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, what?

      You can fly into Havana and get a 30-day tourist visa just like any country in the world. This includes US citizens. I am one, and I've done it. There's no "confinement" to a "staged" Cuba. And the only "risks" involved in doing something other than an all-inclusive vacation tour (it sounds like that was your route) are to your comfort zone. If you've never travelled in the third world, it might be a bit shocking. But no state security is going to come knocking on your door just because you wandered into Havana's ghettos.

      Note to US citizens: now, *our* government may put you at risk -- if you can't go legally like I was able to, be very very smart or wait for *our* government to change, not Cuba's.

      And a note to flamers: yes, there are lots of things wrong with Cuba. But the OP has no idea what he/she is talking about.

    4. Re:Real or staged Cuba? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Castro and his ilk did far more damage to Cuba than any corporate entity could manage, let alone get away with. His country started falling apart once it was no longer propped up by the Soviets. He is a study in the strength of personality and use of tactics similar to East Germany to maintain power

      One could argue that the US's embargo did more damage to Cuba than Castro's regime did. Who really lost from the embargo? Castro? Nope, the citizens did. Embargoes don't work, and it further entrenched Castro as a dictator. Poor people don't really overthrow governments, if Cuba had an established middle class, things might be different now.

  32. The "Roadrunner" of Despots by BeeBeard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It looks as though Father Time will finally accomplish what exploding cigars, poison pills, and even a skin disease-causing fungus could not.

  33. [ot]the not-for-zombies-but-for-rugby-players kind by wild_berry · · Score: 1
  34. Ohh no. More competition. by Forge · · Score: 2, Funny

    We have a hard enough time competing already. Once Americans can go to Cuba legally, How will we Manage?

    Perhaps we can convince them to replace him with someone America doesn't like any better? With his experience in international finance and Aviation, Bin-Laden would be a perfect replacement.

    --
    --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    1. Re:Ohh no. More competition. by wtansill · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we can convince them to replace him with someone America doesn't like any better?
      Well, I hear that "Baby Doc" Duvalier, late of Haiti is still alive and well and living in Paris. Perhaps he could be convinced to take over?
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
  35. Just remember the whole sovereignty thing by pembo13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's often used as an argument as to why the USA shouldn't be bound to international laws that they agree to, or international organizations that they belong to. Seems only fair it should apply to Cuba as well.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Just remember the whole sovereignty thing by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear... not condoning anything any particular country does, just feel they should be allowed to do what they want within their own country.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    2. Re:Just remember the whole sovereignty thing by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear... not condoning anything any particular country does, just feel they should be allowed to do what they want within their own country.

      Does that include killing and/or imprisoning political activists?

      Or Jews?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  36. Thorn in the Side? by Gryle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: "Castro...turned tiny Cuba into a thorn in the paw of the mighty capitalist United States."
    Bay of Pigs was really the fault of Kennedy. So other than the Cuban Missile Crisis, I don't recall Cuba doing anything significantly irritating. I don't think one incident qualifies Cuba for "thorn in paw" status. Perhaps someone more historically enlightened could explain this to me?

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    1. Re:Thorn in the Side? by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Florida is a haven to three large groups of people, the politically liberal retirees from the Northeast, politically conservative retirees from the midwest (this group is smaller than the liberal group) and anti-Castro Cubans who fled. The conservative retirees and Cubans were a large enough group to make Florida a key conservative voting state in Senate and Presidential elections (one of the few large states that is) but only as long as the Republican party carried it's anti-Communist plank long after it was really necessary.

      Castro somehow kept the country from imploding after the Soviet Union failed (and stopped buying Sugar at inflated prices to keep them alive). Simply surviving, without the backing of the most powerful regional nation, was thorn enough.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    2. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Cuba is a thorn in the USA's paw merely by dint of its continued existence. Castro's ability to make the peons eat crap while he lives in a palace set the pattern for every other two bit tinpot dictatorship to resist the pressure of US sanctions as well.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    4. Re:Thorn in the Side? by KillerBob · · Score: 1

      McCarthyism.

      It's not what they did, it's what they are.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    5. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Scarblac · · Score: 3, Informative

      At the time of the revolution, a lot of American-owned property was nationalized.

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
    6. Re:Thorn in the Side? by ZonkerWilliam · · Score: 1

      Bay of Pigs was really the fault of Kennedy

      I wouldn't say that, look at the Bay of Pigs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion,

      The whole idea for an invasion started with Eisenhower and the CIA, Kennedy just inherited it.

    7. Re:Thorn in the Side? by xhrit · · Score: 1

      High-fructose corn syrup. Cube is one a leading producer ov sugarcane. It is a good thing that processed and refined corn can free us from our foreign dependence on resources.

    8. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the time of the American revolution, a lot of Tory-owned property was nationalized and yet we're friends with England and Canada now and we never gave it back.

    9. Re:Thorn in the Side? by kilgortrout · · Score: 1

      During the Cold War, the USSR used Cuba as a proxy to support "wars of liberation" in Africa and other areas. I specifically remember Angola where Cuban military advisers were active in socialist insurgent movements. They were also very active throughout Central and South America as well as the Caribbean in exporting their socialist revolution. I think it's pretty accurate to characterize Cuba as a thorn in the side of US during the Cold War era. After the fall of the USSR, Cuba has been pretty much irrelevant.

    10. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "I don't recall Cuba doing anything significantly irritating."

      Problems? What problems?

      The worse things get in Cuba, the more Cubans wash ashore here. The day that there's an actual change in regime in Cuba is the day the Florida National Guard gets put on alert.

    11. Re:Thorn in the Side? by nexuspal · · Score: 1

      Just watching the history channel here and they allude to a possible motive for Castro to kill Kennedy, because Kennedy was out to kill Castro. It showed an expert from a letter saying, if we're not going to be safe here in Cuba (leaders that is), neither will your leaders be safe. And pres Johnson believed that it was retalliation because of the earlier assasination attempts by Kennedy.

      --
      I've read Slashdot for the last 5 years, and now I start posting... Go figure :-P
    12. Re:Thorn in the Side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American owned property that belonged to Cuba in the first place. Getting it bribing authorities and changing a country's constitutions is NOT LEGAL in the first place. And I am not a lover of Fidel Castro but what's right is right. I in fact hate his totalitarism as much as anybody around.

  37. yay? by jasen666 · · Score: 1

    Maybe now we can end this moronic embargo?

  38. Fidel Castro Resigns? by kellyb9 · · Score: 1

    God, it seems like only yesterday that the US was helping to put him into power....

    1. Re:Fidel Castro Resigns? by Mesa+MIke · · Score: 1

      You must be old here.

  39. Re:News For Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm struggling to see how this is news for nerds. [...] [W]hen can we expect to see /. posts about Brad and Angelina?
    Well--cigars, yes; but which nerd exactly would be interested in Brad and Angelina ...?
  40. Re:News for Nerds by toleraen · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's a story that involves zombies, so it's kinda news for nerds I suppose.

  41. At this point, it's not about that. by jwietelmann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can't be elected by Florida without the Cuban-American vote. You won't get that vote by dropping the embargo on the nation those people fled.

    1. Re:At this point, it's not about that. by colfer · · Score: 1

      Bush and Gore tied, so you must be wrong. Ah, Elian Gonzales, for you a kingdom was lost.

      In case you forgot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elian_Gonzales

    2. Re:At this point, it's not about that. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I can't just help it, but I feel like eliminating Florida from Democratic primaries was a good idea for not one reason, but many...

      Here comes a remark that many will consider racist: the only ethnic group that is more or less split between a white woman and black man is "whites". Other groups are much more strongly influenced but whatever prejudices they have against or pro blacks...

      Latinos, Asians dislike blacks.
      Blacks like blacks.

      Whites have their non-issue too - between genders.

      Nation not ready for democracy after 212 years of it? Or the proverbial melting pot got cold feet and dragging behind the "progress"?

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    3. Re:At this point, it's not about that. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      So you do after having served 2 terms, when your a ridiculously unpopular president, and even your own party has distanced itself from you in the coming election.

      Good news everybody. That exact scenario is upon us. Maybe Bush can do some good before he goes.

    4. Re:At this point, it's not about that. by GregNorc · · Score: 1

      Can you support this with a citation? My college has a number of Cuban American students. I've talked with them about the embargo, and they all felt that all it did was hurt the Cuban people. Keep in mind: Most Cuban immigrants still have relatives living in Cuba.

    5. Re:At this point, it's not about that. by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

      Yes it's called the CANF.

        Look it up

      --
      Libertas in infinitum
  42. nothing to see here by 0111+1110 · · Score: 5, Informative

    As someone who has actually lived in Cuba for more than a year, I thought I should inform some of you that, while it is of some historical importance, this news changes very little politically. His brother Raul is as much of a communist as Fidel. It is highly unlikely that any Cuban policies will change due to this development. I think what we are all waiting for is for both Fidel and Raul to actually die. When that happens there is at least some possibility of real change. And since Bush didn't change his position wrt cuba when Fidel 'temporarily' stepped down due to illness I doubt if he will do so now that the change has been made permanent.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    1. Re:nothing to see here by LittleGuy · · Score: 1

      As someone who has actually lived in Cuba for more than a year, I thought I should inform some of you that, while it is of some historical importance, this news changes very little politically. His brother Raul is as much of a communist as Fidel. It is highly unlikely that any Cuban policies will change due to this development. I think what we are all waiting for is for both Fidel and Raul to actually die.

      Unless Raul turned out to be a Richard Cromwell.

      How does one say "Restoration" in Cuban?

      --
      Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
    2. Re:nothing to see here by flajann · · Score: 1
      If you want to see change, lift the trade embargo already. Allow travel to and from Cuba from the US.

      US policies towards Cuba only works to keep the current regime in power, because they will always be able to say, "see the big bully...!"

      Of course, the US cannot expect to take the moral high ground at all, especially with what the US has been doing in Guantanamo Bay all these years.

      I for one would like to see that depot of torture to come to an end already.

    3. Re:nothing to see here by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "His brother Raul is as much of a dictator as Fidel. "

      There, fixed that for ya'.

      And before the flames start:
      1) Cuba never was, nor has it ever been, "communist". MAYBE socialist.
      2) US policy toward Castro has been a 50 year disaster.
      3) The embargo propped up Fidel - he NEEDED it to continue governing.
      4) The best way to get political change in Cuba is for the US Gov't to simply lift the embargo and then DO NOTHING!. The Cuban government will drown in American dollars from private investment, and the Cuban people, seeing what they REALLY missed for 50 years, will turn on the government. Will a lot of money stick to corrupt hands? Yep, and the Cuban people will still be better off for it.
      5) And as a bonus, it would give a big fat finger to Hugo Chavez.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    4. Re:nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does one say "Restoration" in Cuban?

      Probably the same way one says "Restoration" in Spanish?

    5. Re:nothing to see here by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I thought I should inform some of you that, while it is of some historical importance, this news changes very little politically.

      The biggest question seems to be whether someone who is not Castro can lead as strongly as Castro. If Cuba is a much of a cult of personality as a lot of observers believe, that might not be the case.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:nothing to see here by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      While I don't care to debate with you about the nature of exactly what communism really is, Fidel was nothing if not a Marxist. And if you are going by such strict definitions then there has never been a purely laissez faire capitalist economy nor a purely communist economy in human history. So I'm not sure how useful such strict definitions are.

      And as for point 4, I cannot agree. You are both underestimating and overestimating the Cuban people. You are underestimating them in that they already know what they are missing. They are well aware of the difference between their economy and most others in the world. While there are a few that have been taken in by Fidel's propaganda, a large percentage of the population believes very little of what the government tells them. A few McDonalds and Starbucks in Vedado are not going to change life in the slightest for the average Cuban, who makes less than US $15 per month if they are 'lucky' enough to even have a full time job. A doctor might make $30 to $40 a month.

      You are overestimating the Cuban people when you say that seeing what they are missing in terms of consumer goods is going to incite them to violently overthrow the government. If that were going to happen it would have happened many years ago. Cuban culture is a very laid back and relatively non-violent one. Most Cubans are not willing to kill and die in some bloody struggle for the ability to have even a Sony color TV or a Dell laptop, let alone a Starbucks Latte. They are not so different from American slashdotters in that respect. As enraged and frustrated as we are at the growing list of government power and abuses and the control of our government by large corporations to help the ultra rich get even richer. Is there any amount of injustice that would provoke all of us to go into battle and die to take down the corrupted structure of our growing police state.

      Dropping the US embargo/trade restrictions, while certainly a good and reasonable thing to do, would not really accomplish much at all. They already have plenty of goods in the stores that almost no one can afford to buy from China and Europe. Dropping the travel restrictions would accomplish a bit more actually. Canadian tourism already accounts for a large percentage of their economy. US tourism would no doubt increase that significantly. However, until/unless there is fundamental political change, the Cuban government will be keeping most of that money for themselves. The average Cuban will still be dirt poor and unless their political system moves a great deal in the direction of capitalism, that is not going to change anytime soon.

      While the Cubans are not the Chinese, I happen to think that if a capitalist government were elected (or even appointed), Cuba would have real potential to turn into a sort of Miami. Despite the laid back island atmosphere and attitude of many, there are enough Cubans who are smart and willing to work very hard to produce a real economy there. Cubans are some of the most money conscious people I have ever met. If there is anything more important to them I don't know what it is. Although after half a century of communism (or quasi-communism if you prefer), it might take a while for people to adapt to a more capitalist way of doing things.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    7. Re:nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there has never been a purely laissez faire capitalist economy

      Hong Kong is considered (or was in recent history) by economists to be an example of laissez faire capitalism.


      Note it doesn't mean anarchy. You have a government and courts to enforce contracts, private property, etc. It simply means the government doesn't intervene in the economy.

    8. Re:nothing to see here by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      I think you may have read more than I intended.

      First, My post had nothing to do with "violent overthrow". I said "turn on", and there are many ways of doing that. I think violent revolution is very unlikely, but that doesn't mean the Cubans won't be pissed off enough to demand, and get, change.

      Second, I don't really believe Castro is truly a socialist either. My point wasn't to parse definitions but to point out that he is a dictator, contrary to Marxist ideology. Put it another way - if he is such a devout Marxist, WHY IS HE STILL IN POWER?

      Third, my comments about dropping the embargo included the travel restrictions, but I didn't say that explicitly. My belief is that the US investment in the tourism industry would dwarf the Canadians and Europeans.

      Fourth, you are focusing on the demand side of poverty - people want things but don't have the money, so no one will be able to buy American stuff. But what about the supply side? If American businesses employ Cubans for better wages, they WILL have some more money.

      Fifth, there is a difference between "seeing" what their lives could be like and actually getting a taste of it. It's funny you mention China - their biggest political problem is the peasantry getting a little bit of the economic growth thrown there way, but seeing their countrymen making orders of magnitude more yuan. If the rural areas were being kept down as hard as they were, there would be less of a problem - the local farmer's attitude would be "I think I'd like a piece of that pie, but us folks will never see any.". But by giving them a taste, they are now saying "Wait a minute - this pie tastes great, and I want more of it. Why can't I get more of it?"

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  43. Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Troll

    Bloke's been in charge for half a century and he's finally stepping down.

    In other news Ronald Reagan can take credit for the fall of the USSR, not the internal politics which were bringing the Soviet Reign to an end.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by mrxak · · Score: 1

      Bush has got to be pretty happy, he could have been American president #10 that Castro outlasted.

    2. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Bush has got to be pretty happy, he could have been American president #10 that Castro outlasted. On the other hand, Castro has to be a bit miserable at the prospect of not outlasting W.
      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by Applekid · · Score: 0, Troll

      When you're the only candidate on the ballot, have no term limits, and any contenders to the office find their limbs chopped off and families murdered, yeah, I guess your reign can last as long as you want it to, old age not withstanding.

      Heh, another net positive that Bush can claim credit for even though he had no hand in it's happening.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    4. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      ...and any contenders to the office find their limbs chopped off and families murdered...

      What a load of propagandist crap. That never happened.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    5. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by bytesex · · Score: 1

      While you state your payload a bit trollishly, it is indeed good to remind everyone from time to time that the initiators of the Cuban revolution and their associate members (Che) were (and are) indeed no strangers to limitless incarceration, torture and execution without trial. IOW, lots of people having lots of blood on their hands, who can only hope to outlast the offspring of their enemies or be forgiven because it's been such a goddamn long time.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    6. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Informative

      No evidence of limb chopping to a casual search.
      Lots of executions but mainly during the first 15 years of his rule. Since then it seems to mostly be arbitrary prison terms and allowing the prisoners to be abused (physically and sexually). However, this also happens in American Prisons and America incarcerates its own citizens at a higher rate- we just make everything illegal so we do not have to use bogus crimes like "insulting the president" to put someone away for seven years. OTH, you better not say anything mildly threatening or your fate will be similar. Of course, America has become a lot more of a fascist dictatorship than it was in 1960. And, of course, any good discussion needs to point out that Cuba was a dictatorship and 3/4 of it's property was not owned by its own citizens (conditions ripe for revolution by *someone* and a lot of revolutions were occuring- castro was just the successful one).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro#Human_rights_record

      Human rights record

              Main article: Human rights in Cuba

      Thousands of political opponents to the Castro regime have been killed, primarily during the first decade of his leadership.[135][136] Some Cubans labeled "counterrevolutionaries", "fascists", or "CIA operatives" were also imprisoned in poor conditions without trial.[137][138] Military Units to Aid Production, or UMAPs, were labor camps established in 1965 to confine "social deviants" including homosexuals, Jehovah Witnesses to work "counter-revolutionary" influences out of certain segments of the population.[139] The camps were closed in 1967 in response to international outcries.[140] Professor Marifeli Pérez Stable, a Cuban immigrant and former Castro supporter has said that "There were thousands of executions, forty, fifty thousand political prisoners. The treatment of political prisoners, with what we today know about human rights and the international norms governing human rights ... it is legitimate to raise questions about possible crimes against humanity in Cuba."[141]

      Castro acknowledges that Cuba holds political prisoners, but argues that Cuba is justified because these prisoners are not jailed because of their political beliefs, but have been convicted of "counter-revolutionary" crimes, including bombings. Castro portrays opposition to the Cuban government as illegitimate, and the result of an ongoing conspiracy fostered by Cuban exiles with ties to the United States or the CIA. .[142]

      http://www.hrw.org/wr2k2/americas5.html

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    7. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Informative

      And don't forget that before Castro's revolution, Cuba was ruled by Batista - a dictator propped up by the US government. Batista killed up to 20000 people, mostly political prisoners and many were tortured.

      Batista staged a military coup when it was clear he was going to lose an election. Casto was leader of one of the opposition parties and was jailed as a result. So gee - I wonder why Castro was a bit pissed at the US?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    8. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      However, this also happens in American Prisons and America incarcerates its own citizens at a higher rate- we just make everything illegal so we do not have to use bogus crimes like "insulting the president" to put someone away for seven years.

      Cuba has judicial due process with jury trials? Cuba has legalized prostitution and marijuana? What exactly is illegal here that's legal in Cuba?

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    9. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What exactly is illegal here that's legal in Cuba?

      Visiting Cuba?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    10. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I'm sure their judicial process has a lot less protections- yet we put away our people into prison and make them criminals at a higher rate than any 1st (and i think 2nd) world countries on the planet. European countries have a presumption of guilt-- and yet imprison their own people less than we do. The US and Briton are imprisoning people at such a high rate that they are trying to find ways (collars) of keeping them prisoner in their own homes. It's really scary and yet we are letting it happen step by step with cameras and home jails.

      Property taxes are so high that we effectively rent our homes and land from the government and must work as wage slaves our entire lives (quit your job for 24 months and you will almost certainly be homeless even if you "own" your own home).

      Don't look at the words and hand-waving. Look at what is *actually* happening. Lots of disenfranchised and incarcerated citizens. The ultra-rich just walking all over the other 99% of society (and owning 90% of the assets now). It's like an aristocracy but we pretend it is a democracy. In 80% of cases, our votes do not even matter- the candidates are selected for us. Large corporations and the ultra-wealthy own 90% of our congressmen and senators outright.

      Public spaces like beaches and mountains are increasingly sold out-right to the ultra-wealthy (including ultra-wealthy foreign nationals). People who legally purchased good property 30 years ago are now having it condemned and taken from them and given to the ultra-wealthy. The executive (i.e. noble) class receives compensation hundreds or even thousands of times higher than the average population.

      Public property (like shows, plays, songs) are also being locked in perpetuity for the wealthy preventing new derivative works. Effective previously legal natural supplements are being banned (without any justification) so that the profits from patented drugs (which are effectively identical to the supplements but with a few molecules moved around) will be protected.

      (answering your question)
      We have legalized prostitution in Nevada. It should be legal everywhere and through the wonders of craigslist and it basically is.
      Marijuana is mostly a misdemeanor issue here.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    11. Re:Yeah, Mission accomplished, watch W take credit by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      But in Cuba, it's illegal to visit America! Or, for that matter, leave the country. Travel restrictions are a way in which Americans are more free than Cubans, not less.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  44. Is it sad... by Datamonstar · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... that I found out about this on /. when I have CNN on right now? Half expected them to announce a new Firefox 'sploit.

    --
    The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
  45. Local farming to suffer? by JayPee · · Score: 1

    Too bad their farming self-sufficiency will once again, be at the whims of foreign multinationals because, that's what freedom is all about. Freedom to buy foreign goods and services.

    http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1994/11/mm1194_06.html

    1. Re:Local farming to suffer? by JayPee · · Score: 1
  46. Re:News For Nerds by eepok · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nerds are interested in many a subject. I am an education/tech nerd. I'm pretty damn sure there's quite a few politics and history nerds in here, too.

    Beyond that, why complain when genuine news hits the front page? Did you complain when Slashdot was holding up the internets when the towers fell?

  47. Re:News For Nerds by cthulu_mt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Link please.

    No really, please.

    Ohh god...I want to know a woman before I die....

    *whipmer*

    --
    Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  48. Castro's bum rap by JulianConrad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For all his faults, in some ways Castro valued human life more than you'd expect from all the propaganda in the U.S. about "communism." He kept his people from starving in the 1990's after the collapse of the Soviet Union cut off a lot of Cuba's oil supply (unlike North Korea's Kim, who clearly doesn't give a crap about the starving people under his heel); at least Cubans don't have to eat dirt, literally, like their neighbors on Haiti. He's kept up a basic healthcare system and invested his country's meager resources into finding treatments for tropical poor people's diseases ignored by Western pharmaceutical companies. He had moved his country's population out of harm's way when the inevitable hurricanes rake across the island. And he even offered to send medical help to the U.S. for Hurricane Katrina's victims. So in some nontrivial respects he wasn't a totally bad guy.

    1. Re:Castro's bum rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that Cuba's health care system not only works but it also is good enough for some European countries to fly their citizens there to be treated.

    2. Re:Castro's bum rap by txmadman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, explain all that to the hundreds of Cubans who annually try to float on inner tubes to Key West. If they fail, they die. If they are caught by this humanitarian's police or military, they go to jail.

      In spite of all our debates about whether or not Castro is good/bad/indifferent, I look to the fact that people are willing to die or go to prison as a reliable indicator of the quality of life there.

      I might agree that he is not as bad as Kim Jong-il, but that is hardly a compliment, is it?

      And why the qualifier quotes on "communism", anyway? Castro is perfectly comfortable saying he is a communist, why can't you admit he is?

    3. Re:Castro's bum rap by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      He's kept up a basic healthcare system and invested his country's meager resources into finding treatments for tropical poor people's diseases ignored by Western pharmaceutical companies.

      Isn't that generous of him? If he hadn't tried to hard to maintain a communist system and keep out "capitalist" influences, maybe Western pharmaceutical companies would have spent their more-than-meager resources finding even better treatments.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    4. Re:Castro's bum rap by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I hate to break this to you, but that is a myth. All of the medical care I have seen there is about what you would expect from a third world country. Neither much better nor much worse. Actually, with the possible exception of one or two hospitals in Havana, particularly Cira Garcia, which very few Cubans could ever afford, I would rate health care there as being at a somewhat lower level than most of the third world countries I have traveled to. Certainly it could never hope to compare to countries like Colombia or Mexico or Argentina or Thailand. If there are any foreigners traveling to Cuba for medical care they are very, very stupid. And indeed I have never met any myself.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    5. Re:Castro's bum rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bum rap? BUM RAP?

      Don't try to talk about how Castro was not a "totally bad guy" with people who remember when he pointed nukes at the USA. Hopefully when he dies, we can bring him back to life in order to kill him again.

      Castro made his choice. Perhaps if his people HAD suffered more, he would have been taken out of power much sooner, or preferably, killed like a pit bull that mauled your three year old daughter.

    6. Re:Castro's bum rap by JulianConrad · · Score: 1

      Well, explain all that to the hundreds of Cubans who annually try to float on inner tubes to Key West.
      By that line of reasoning, the millions of Mexicans who've flooded into the U.S. must make Mexico far worse than Cuba.

      And why the qualifier quotes on "communism", anyway? Castro is perfectly comfortable saying he is a communist, why can't you admit he is?
      The Chinese leaders call themselves "communists" as well, but their country's economy has exploded with capitalistic activity. I don't think the labels "communist" and "communism" mean much any more.
    7. Re:Castro's bum rap by JulianConrad · · Score: 1

      I hate to break this to you, but that is a myth. All of the medical care I have seen there is about what you would expect from a third world country. Neither much better nor much worse. Actually, with the possible exception of one or two hospitals in Havana, particularly Cira Garcia [cirag.cu], which very few Cubans could ever afford, I would rate health care there as being at a somewhat lower level than most of the third world countries
      Cuba makes many observers' lists of the world's healthiest countries. For example: The List: World's Healthiest Countries
    8. Re:Castro's bum rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the army is still omni-present, but at least they don't have a "Great Firewall", or a political party openly killing anyone who thinks a certain way. In Cuba you don't necessarily starve; it's not paradise, it's not hell.

      I just hope they can stay there on their little island, and things get better. A US invasion/"invasion" would be bad for everyone.

    9. Re:Castro's bum rap by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      He executes political prisoners.  A slave master who is often kind and takes good care of his property is still a slave master.

    10. Re:Castro's bum rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. Castro's a great guy. Follow this link to read approximately 9100 people who disagree, because they have been murdered. http://cubaarchive.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=14&Itemid=96/

      Or you could instead read this about Castro's firing squads, a little piece of history most people have forgotten. Don't forget to click on the Videos link at the top for videos about Cuba, to see just how grand a guy Castro is.
      http://www.therealcuba.com/page5.htm

      No, after reviewing the information contained in these links you will come to realize what a scourge on a nation Castro is. And as a Cuban, it makes me truly cry thinking about what this man has done to this once-proud nation. A true, free democracy is the future of Cuba, and I hope that this comes sooner rather than later.

    11. Re:Castro's bum rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There's a difference between bad and worse. I doubt that Castro has actually killed 9100 people -- but even if he had, he would still be vastly better than the guy he ousted.

      Fulgencio Batista was a typical U.S. puppet, who gave away 75% of his country to U.S. "businessmen" (i.e. mobsters) and did not hesitate to commit mass murder. Roughly 20,000 to 50,000 Cubans were killed by Batista's regime.

      Batista was the Cuban version of Saddam Hussein. Or, given the actual timescales, you might say that Saddam was the Iraqi version of Batista.

      While Castro might not have been an angel, he was vastly better for the Cuban people than any of the U.S. puppets.

  49. Nothing will change... by LuisAnaya · · Score: 1

    I heard the news on the radio, I also tuned in to Radio Habana and heard the same. For those who are waiting for changes, nothing will change, Raul and the rest of Fidel's cronies will continue with the "revolution". It would take more than a generation to see any meaningful changes in Cuba.

    --
    Vi havas e-poston.
    1. Re:Nothing will change... by Max_W · · Score: 1

      Meaningful changes? Like Iraq style "democracy" on the American bayonets?

    2. Re:Nothing will change... by rezalas · · Score: 1

      We stopped using Bayonets actively in Vietnam Max. Now we shoot people with high tech bullets and make knives that push themselves through you for us. Sheesh, if you are going to point out our hobbies at least involve yourself in knowing something about them. On a serious note, you have no clue and sadly never will. Its funny how the people who talk the most shit are the ones who haven't even been there.

    3. Re:Nothing will change... by Max_W · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I have pity of you. You are a nation which was traumatized by the destruction of you pride, New York City. "I built the towers to the sky."

      You are passed the denial, and entered the anger phase.

      We understand it. But, please, understand too that we do not believe you anymore when you talk about "democracy", "change", etc. In our eyes you are not a carrier of democratic ideas anymore. You are just an angry traumatized country.

    4. Re:Nothing will change... by LuisAnaya · · Score: 1
      I never said that Cuba should become a democracy, they can be as socialist and communist as they want to be. Keep in mind that Cuba used to be a rightist dictatorship before Castro. That was not a good government policy either. The part that the US wants for Cuba is simple:

      1. Don't keep the same guy forever. Hey, they can rotate a communist for another every so often. Would make the US happy.
      2. Allow people to disagree with the government without being thrown in jail or being harassed.
      3. Have more than one party, even having two parties like the US would make the US happy. They do not have to own the majority, just a couple of seats in the parliament would keep the US happy.

      Cuba can keep the same form of government and be as socialist as they want. But that would not happen, until a couple of generations pass by. In the meantime, the US will be the major supply of cash-only chickens to Cuba for the time being.

      Let's talk about the US.

      You must not be an American (is the "you, you thing") and I respect your point of view, just keep in mind that:
      1. US will build the freedom tower, just to stick it.
      2. US will continue to defend its interest by force, in the case of Iraq is oil, we like our gas guzzling SUV's, democracy is just secondary, as long as we have more oil rich friendly countries or cheap goods. (Afghanistan was basically for target practice). All this at the expense on the economy.

      I do not know, if I were you, I would be concerned of angered countries with nukes.

      --
      Vi havas e-poston.
    5. Re:Nothing will change... by rezalas · · Score: 1

      Actually most of Americans aren't from New York City, and thus it isn't our pride. I myself am from Oklahoma, and it didn't affect me all too much when the towers fell. Mind you, I felt sad for the loss, but I didn't feel angry about it. See, Sometimes the answer is significantly more simple than you believe it to be. This one is even more so. We aren't angry, we are in Iraq because we were told to go by our government. No other reason will do, and honestly all other reasons are bullshit. See, my family has alot of soldiers serving there, and noone of them want to be there but we are anyway. It has nothing to do with anger or the towers. It has to do with orders. Democracy to the people is a nice idea and I'm sure it is a goal, but certainly not the main one (which should be obvious by now egh?). No, there are no illusions to be had at this point. It is simple: we are there because we were told to be. Don't feel pity, feel remorse for those who will die because they do as they are told, because if they don't they will suffer just as much.

    6. Re:Nothing will change... by Max_W · · Score: 1
      OK. I understand.

      Still I wish your country heals well after this trauma.

    7. Re:Nothing will change... by russotto · · Score: 1

      We understand it. But, please, understand too that we do not believe you anymore when you talk about "democracy", "change", etc. In our eyes you are not a carrier of democratic ideas anymore. You are just an angry traumatized country.


      And what sort of hellhole are you from? Canada, with its identity based on being "not the US"? French Canada, with its identity based on being "not English-speaking Canada"? Western Europe, a decrepit corpse whose glory days were passed centuries ago? Africa, a mess anywhere you look? Mexico, South or Central America, where corruption is just a way of doing business? Russia, which threw off the yoke of communism only to embrace another dictator?
    8. Re:Nothing will change... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Or the US, where the dollar is being devalued, the economy is getting swamped by a recession, and where a the current President won his first election through a quasi-legal SCOTUS decision?

      I'm no anti-American, but you're anti-everyone-else only convinces me that those in glass houses should not throw stones...

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  50. Re:News For Nerds by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although I agree with your point that US relations with Cuba isn't exactly news for nerds, news about Brad and Angelina isn't news for ANYBODY. They're just actors. Nothing thay doe will affect the world, let alone MY world. Castro resigning does, in fact, affect me.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  51. Property by Morosoph · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.

    What international entreprise should have long written off can become an incentive for revolution, and an opportunity for trade on the part of the Cubans and the US.

    What would be an utter failure would be for Cubans to feel as the Russians do, that state oppression has been replaced with private sector oppression. Cubans deserve the property that their government has taken from then, as well as international entreprises, which would otherwise have created the opportunity for mutual benefit.

    If a write-off is politically untenable, then compensation is called for, but the Cubans should not pay for it.

    1. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.

      The US should stay the hell away from the internal affairs of other sovereign countries.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    2. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population."

      What is US would once in a lifetime do something right and would'nt involve other countries politics. US history is full of murders and other terrorist acts to get own puppet goverment up and running. US shouldn't speak anything and atleast, should not cross own broderds, because US should first learn what is democracy and how much good socialism does (socialism != communism).
      Whole US is scare off about socialism, how evil it is and how bad things would go and goverment terrorize own people with it!

      If US would be good country, in any level, they would stop right away that terrorist act as blockage called, and would allow freedom to all humans. But no, it's not ideal because other nations money and power would'nt be in hands of US goverment/corporations. Many countries in european has socialistic ways to do things and everything is going better than in US, where goverment rules everything and stupid white people just repeat that as "God allows our acts" and "we are people under a God!"

    3. Re:Property by AndGodSed · · Score: 5, Funny

      I second that. USA is not the worlds policeman.

      as to your sig:

      "Hold on Dad, I'll go." - Jesus

    4. Re:Property by sethstorm · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The US should stay the hell away from the internal affairs of other sovereign countries. That does not mean they walk in ours, walk out with jobs, dump currency, buy votes as a nonvoting class, buy controlling chunks of US companies with their government funds, and have systemic problems with human rights that are far worse than the US(and have US companies that are complicit in these violations).

      That is when it becomes our issue. That is when we need to act to remove the interference, with no limit to the action required to remove it.
      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    5. Re:Property by Huntr · · Score: 1

      Those sovereign countries shouldn't seize the assets of US businesses in said country.

    6. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Those sovereign countries shouldn't seize the assets of US businesses in said country.

      The US has never done such things? Iraqi oil... bogus inflated loans (read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman") etc

    7. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      So when Germany was liquidating a portion of it's citizenry the US should have just minded its own business?

    8. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "The US should stay the hell away from the internal affairs of other sovereign countries."

      How is this possibly marked "insightful"?

      The US can, should, and (more often than most other countries) does take useful measures to improve the human condition - humanitarian projects, encouraging democratic political reform, standing up for human rights. France, Germany, China, etc. - they should all do the same. Or are you buying into China's point of view, eg. that cheap oil from the Sudan is more important than preventing genocide?

    9. Re:Property by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

      Can you then explain why more people want immigrate from Europe to the US than the other way around?
      Oh, I am sorry, I am sure you have a bad explanation for that too.

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    10. Re:Property by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      IMO that's for those private businessmen to deal with, not the government. Their risk for investing into a politically unstable region.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    11. Re:Property by J+Cardella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I could not agree more. US Foreign Aid does more harm than good, and should be stopped until proper oversight can be assured. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Issues/issuearea/ForeignAid.cfm

    12. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US can, should, and (more often than most other countries) does take useful measures to improve the human condition - humanitarian projects, encouraging democratic political reform, standing up for human rights.

      Do you have any idea what your government does with its foreign policy?? How about assasinating democratically elected leaders (Iran, most of central America, etc), providing weapons to terrorists (to the Taliban in Afghanistan against USSR, Iran against Iraq, Iraq against Iran, etc), setting up puppet governments (Panama, Cuba, etc), and keeping detainees on foreign soil for years without trial or any charges (Guantanamo, facilities in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc). Shall I go on?

      In short - clean up your own crap before you go finger pointing at other countries.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    13. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On behalf of "stupid white people" everywhere, consider this an engraved invitation to suck my democratic dick, you racist fucktard. If your country is so goddamned superior that it completely keeps its nose out of the affairs of every other nation on earth, then I can't wait to hear what you think of it in 50 years when the speed-breeding Muslims have taken over and suddenly you find yourself paying a tax for going to the wrong church.

      Allahu akbar, motherfucker...

    14. Re:Property by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm pretty sure the Germans were against those actions, whereas the Cubans are largely happy with the way their country works.

      Sure, the dual economy is wrecking them on an international market, but hopefully the increased presence globally will help with that. As a building technologist who has worked in Cuba (Canada and Cuba get along great, I can actually buy Cuban cigars at the Hasty Mart down the street from my house) I can tell you that Cuba is doing the best they can with a bad starting position, and it's really quite pleasant down there. A poor economy != unhappy population.

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    15. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.

      No, the US should let the Cubans take care of the Cubans! Besides everyone is in Iraq sticking their noses where they don't belong already.

    16. Re:Property by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How do we know whether Cubans are happy or not. A shitload of them have, over the last half century, have done everything from steal airplanes to put inflatables on their cars to try to get to Florida. In Cuba itself, if you're too vocal, you're chucked in jail and officially declared a US patsy. There are no free elections and no free press. The standard of living is in the shits, their isn't enough electricity, and the only the way country seems to be functioning now is to turn itself into a client state of China, just as it had been of the USSR for decades.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    17. Re:Property by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ... because I've talked to them?

      But you're right, you have no reason to believe me. Having two sides to a story just muddles things up.

      But I have to ask.... do you need electricity to have a good life? Or do you, maybe, just need a different routine? They don't watch much TV down there. The families I talked to all spent time with eachother. They played sports. They did laundry with hand-operated machines, or at laundromats. They danced to music on the radio. Above all, they were smiling through all these "hardships" and in spite of their poor "standard of living".

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    18. Re:Property by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The US should stay the hell away from the internal affairs of other sovereign countries."

      If this was south Asia or sub-Saharan Africa, you might have a point, but when it comes to something only 90 miles away from our shores, such "international" issues can quickly become domestic. Either we make sure that other governments in the region are stable and tenable, or we deal with yet another wave of tens (or even hundreds) of thousands of refugees washing up in south Florida.

      Like it or not, this is yet another matter in th Caribbean that either the State Department or the Homeland Security Department has to deal with, and I'd wager you'd prefer the former.

    19. Re:Property by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't recall saying "all", but your pedantry has been noted.

      I talked to several, notably skilled engineers, lawyers, and the "poor people" the water treatment plant was going to be supplying water to. Better?

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    20. Re:Property by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I just wish Cuba would become a free, democratic nation, and be open back up to the world at large.

      It would be cool to have a new Caribbean vacation spot so close to the US....

      Go down to Key West to party...jump on a boat and run to Cuba to party there for a bit too....what a blast!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    21. Re:Property by Phat_Tony · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.

      Effecting lasting vestment by the people is a matter of a functioning ongoing system more so than a matter of initial distribution. You bring up the Russian example. Russia actually had one of the most successful programs ever instituted to privatize their industry by giving it to the people.

      Look at section 1.2.2 here and at this article from Reason.

      Russia gave every citizen a voucher that could be used in auctions to bid upon state enterprises being privatized. There was a free market in these vouchers. Any group of people could band together to pool their vouchers to buy their portion of previously state-run industry and own it privately. Or they could sell their vouchers and get significant real value for them, and use that for whatever they needed it for. Either way, everyone got their share. The division of state run enterprises went very well for a while. Sure, too many enterprises were dolled out directly to the powerful and connected and bypassed the voucher auctions, but otherwise, it was a pretty good system.

      The reason it didn't end up working was due to a lack of rule of law and to corruption, not a failure to give the property to the Russian population. Many foreign investors flocked to Russia to capitalize on their underpaid but highly educated population. Many people used their voucher money to start their own small businesses. Groups of people who pooled their vouchers tried to run the industries they bought.

      But people in power took it all away; from the foreign investors, and from the local Russian population. If you wanted to get your raw materials imported, or keep your electricity on, or get work permits, or pass inspections, or have access to markets- it all required too many bribes to stay in business. In some instances, people with guns just came in and took everything. You can't have functioning capitalism if you don't have free competition, but instead have thugs come and take the profits from anyone who's successful.

      A fair initial distribution of property in the privatization process is important, but as Russia has shown us, it is far from sufficient to ensure any kind of equality or lasting vestment for the people. The most important thing for giving people a fair shot is to weed out the corruption and follow rule of law.

      You can hire any reputable consulting firm to have a bunch of economists and MBA's draw up a relatively efficient and equitable market based allocation program for privatizing state resources to the people. Unfortunately, it is much harder to take a system riddled with endemic corruption and full of powerful people used to ruling like czars and transform that into a system dominated by honesty and law. There is no easy prescription for this transformation; weeding out corruption is riddled with tricky political, psychological, social, and economic dilemmas to which there is no straight-forward solution.
      --
      Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
    22. Re:Property by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "How about assasinating democratically elected leaders (Iran, most of central America, etc)"

      Exactly who have we (US) assassinated in recent history? I know we did try on Fidel a long time ago, but, none that I know of since then....against our official policy to assassinate leaders of countries.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    23. Re:Property by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.
      You win the epic short-sightedness award!
      If the state reinstates property rights and redistributes property to the people, one generation later, the people will have voluntarily sold the property to international developers.

      If the people do not have the right to sell their own property, then it isn't actually their property.

      The inevitable result of property rights is property in the hands of those who can use it most productively. The only alternative is to allow the state to own all property, giving those in power a dictatorial position.

      Life isn't fair, but capitalism sucks less than anything else we've tried.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    24. Re:Property by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That only requires changes in our local laws, not that we interfere inside their country.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    25. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      If this was south Asia or sub-Saharan Africa, you might have a point, but when it comes to something only 90 miles away from our shores, such "international" issues can quickly become domestic.

      Russia is only 55 miles away and Canada is even closer. Neither Russia nor Canada have issues with Cuba, and the US doesn't have any (or much) mingling with Russia or Canada. I'm not sure why Cuba is special in the eyes of the US state department. It's not like they can do anything to you.

      As far as I can tell, the department of homeland security is staffed by a bunch of paranoid Nazis.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    26. Re:Property by HiThere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It *would* have become a free, democratic nation if we hadn't originally spruned Castro's overtures of friendship. Then he was, essentially, forced to turn to either Russia or China...and Russia offered him more. (Remember Castro was a graduate of, I believe, Harvard. He *expected* to normalize relations with the US quickly. But he was also a pragmatist, and looked for support where he could get it after we rebuffed him.)

      As to Batista's friends who held that property...they deserved much worse. Land grants by a dictator are a poor basis for claims to recompense when someone else comes to power. (Is Castro a dictator? I don't know. Definitely not to the same extent that Batista was. Batista was vile.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    27. Re:Property by foetusinc · · Score: 1, Troll

      Please, drop the simplistic let-he-who-is-without-sin crap. The world is not black and white, and history is the story of thousands of years of lesser evils. There isn't a nation or a people on earth without blood so deep in the seams of their hands they can't tell it from their own. Grow some perspective and stop reading so much Chomsky.

    28. Re:Property by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Then why have we so consistently over the last several decades acted in ways that *destabilize* the Cuban government?

      Sorry, your hypothesis doesn't match observed data.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    29. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Harvard? No, he went to the University of Havana.

    30. Re:Property by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The US did the same thing to China when Mao attempted to make overtures. Instead of admitting that Chang Kai-shek's Kuomintang had been routed and turned into a Formosan rump, and dealing with the guys that actually controlled China, the US cemented this bizarre Nationalist China theory for three decades, forcing China to turn to the USSR (not that that turned out all that great for the Soviets in the end) and leading to three decades of isolation.

      As bad as Communism was, and as necessary as I think Containment was, the US was never sophisticated enough to realize that it wasn't fighting an ideology, it was fighting an expansionist imperial power. They bought into the Leninist-Marxist line just as much as the Russians did, and didn't recognize the historical trends that had been taking place ever since the Muscovite princes had cast of the Tatars and had began building a Eurasian empire. Just because the top bananas that replaced the Romanovs liked to spout nonsensical political theory didn't fundamentally mean that their goals were one iota different.

      That's the problem with the US. I think it suffers from a case of pathological idealism. Because it was founded on high ideals, it tends to assume that its enemies and allies must be of a similar vein, that somehow revolution always represents some vast dividing line between past, present and future. In reality, the Russian and Chinese revolutions (the latter of which was really a century-long conflict to boot out the Great Powers) made huge changes, but ultimately created new governments that in many ways simply modeled themselves on old ones.

      In Russia, the leadership moved into the Kremlin, the gentry were replaced by Communist party members, and Peter the Great's revolution to modernize and industrialized Russia continued, every bit as recklessly as it ever had been. In China, Mao took on the airs of the emperors of old, behaving in many ways like them, isolating himself and creating a god-like aura that invoked, without coming out and saying it, the Mandate of Heaven. In fact, after Mao's authority began slipping, and ever since then, the old court ideals of Confucianism have been reborn as the new generation of leaders attempts to combat the age-old Chinese problem of a corrupt bureaucracy.

      Communism is simply a state religion. Every once in a while, someone like Mao or Lenin will come along and actually take them seriously, but for the most part it's simply a ritual, a sort of cross in the sky that the faithful are supposed to follow, while in reality it's just the same old empire-building and power centralization that has dominated human affairs since we settled down to form civilizations. If the US had understood this during the Cold War, it would have been much more likely to co-operate with Communist China and Cuba, recognizing that guys like Mao and Castro were just the same-ol' with a different jive talk. Imagine the world today if Latin America and China, who had long had respect for the United States and its earlier, more neutral position, had been embraced, regardless of the political stripes of their leadership. Imagine if Mao and Castro hadn't had to fling themselves at the Soviets, or a Latin America where there weren't tragedies like Chile? The short-sighted and mistaken goals of Containment continue to haunt the US to this day.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    31. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry 'assassinated' was probably too strong a word - should have been 'illegally overthrown'.

      In 1953 the US government helped overthrow the democratically elected leader of Iran, setting up the previous pro-American monarch the Shaw. He was then eventually overthrown in 1979 and you get the middle-east mess you get now with religious nutbars ruling the country.

      How about 1989 when the CIA invaded panama to overthrow Noriega who dictator of Panama and on the CIA payroll since the early 70's. The CIA backing likely helped his rise to power and his defacto takeover of the Panamanian government.

      And what about Regan funding the anti-government Contras in Nicaragua, funding it through drug trade and illegal weapons deals with Iran?

      Lets not forget the funding and training of the anti-government Mujahideen forces in Afghanistan (now the Taliban) against the Soviet government.

      Basically point to any trouble spot today and you can find US meddling in the recent past.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    32. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read my post above then recomment. All the US 'lesser sins' are in the past 50 years and have really made a mess of world politics. And now your country is near bankrupt trying to fund multiple wars with they started and are responsible for! Nice going.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    33. Re:Property by dbrutus · · Score: 1

      If a private businessman were to actually try to deal with it, the US taxpayer would pay for his arrest, trial, and imprisonment. The Westphalian system restricts private actors from dealing with a lot of goofball things foreign governments do. The government is supposed to do it instead.

    34. Re:Property by radzhome · · Score: 1

      Cubans own their homes..

    35. Re:Property by wanderingknight · · Score: 2, Informative

      To add to the GP's point, the US was extremely supportive of the military dictatorships that ruled over South America in the 60's and 70's. A great deal of the South American countries' current economic problems have to do with the debts contracted by the military governments who, with support from the IMF, literally sold the country away to their big international corporate friends. Remember--the IMF had swore under the Washington Treaty never to lend any money to countries under a non-democratic regime, since evidently it was hard to guarantee the use of the money in favor of the people of those countries... but they did it anyways. The money ended up in the military governors & friends' pockets, and the debt is ours to pay.

      Thank you, US.

    36. Re:Property by Mate+Cocido · · Score: 1

      > The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population. Did you say the US? what is the purpose of the UN then? Why should the US do this? Why should a country alone take part in every foreign affair that appears in the world? Why should US invade, attack (defend?), take control, restablish democracy (I'm being ironic here) in another country? I think you have seen Rambo III too many times. There is a completely different world outside the US, life is not a scene of the Independance Day film.

    37. Re:Property by dbrutus · · Score: 1

      While healthcare is "free" in Castro's Cuba, the doctors have virtually nothing to offer sick people in terms of medicine, medical devices, and decent facilities. There is a two tier system. If you're a foreigner or part of the party high ups, you can get decent healthcare. If you're part of the vast majority of the population, you get shafted and get to watch your relatives die before their time. How are they smiling then?

    38. Re:Property by sumdumass · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Unfortunately the world would be a far worse off place if the leaders of the world thought that.

      The UN is to inept to act as such and frankly, I would be worried if they could be the world police. Of course all the complaining about the US meddling into other countries offairs by backing rebels or funding failing government has seen a rise in US hands on commitments. It is a damned if you do and damned if you done situation there.

    39. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      emigrate from Europe to the US
      immigrate to the US from Europe

    40. Re:Property by gnuman99 · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is not about being a policeman or not. USA is actually a policeman of the world in many ways, and that's why things are the way they are. I think more stable, but then whatever.

      *but* US should say out of Cuban politics for *many* reasons that have nothing to do with policeman of the world.

        1. Cold War is over
        2. Communism is not a "threat" - it is a political/economic system that doesn't work
        3. Cuba's communism is not as bad as many gov'ts that US has put in place because the countries in question had *democratically* *elected* socialist governments. Peru is an example. Panama. Nicaragua. The perpetual war in Colombia largely because of the "no talk with FARC" bullshit (and now FARC is very radicalized because of that policy over the last few decades).
        4. China? China's communism and nationalism is a much larger threat than Cuba ever was
        5. Don't bring up the "Cuban Missile Crises" - was it OK for US to put missiles in Turkey on USSR border first? Does US really keep grudges for half a century?
        6. Batista was a corrupt ass and US in fifties were bunch of racists - Cuba's revolution was the natural outcome of US's corrupt influence there at the time.
        7. Castro wasn't a commie from the get go - US stance to support Batista during the revolt and even after it alienated Castro and USSR took the opportunity.
        8. Iraq? - lesson to stay out of internal affairs of other countries
        9. Priorities?? see Darfur/Sudan, Iran, North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Zionist/Palestine insanity, China, Global Warming, scientific research, space, etc. All more important than Cuba *ever* was.

    41. Re:Property by dedalus2000 · · Score: 1

      US companies were only there after the US attempted to annex Cuba during the Spanish American war. the original Cuban independence movement only agreed to accept US help after congress passed a resolution declaring that the US had no intention to annex the island. you can imagine that after fighting and dieing to free themselves from the control of a large colonial power that they wouldn't be too keen on another moving in to take it's place. that right there was why Castro was able to come to power US imperialism made Castro the lesser of two evils.

      Can you imagine how US history would have been different if France having supported us through the revolution had then seized the new capital and declared us a colony with enough force to make their deceleration stand?

      --
      My keyboads not woking popely.
    42. Re:Property by PPH · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Meanwhile, in other news: US organized crime wants its Cuban property back.


      Keep in mind that Castro was considered to be a 'good guy' by both the Cuban and US public when he sought to overthrow Batista. It wasn't until foreign (i.e. US Mafia and industrial) interests realized that he was actually serious about ending corruption that they turned against him. An alliance with the Soviet Union was his only hope of survival. Either that or agreeing to be nothing more than the next piano player in a whorehouse for US interests.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    43. Re:Property by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't believe you are saying this with a straight face. Sure, many Cubans have attempted to leave Cuba for the US. That's because Cuba is comparatively poorer than the US (and is the subject of an economic embargo to boot). But people who bring up Cubans trying to leave Cuba seem to conveniently forget the never ending tidal wave of illegal economic migrants from supposedly "free" countries like Mexico and the rest of Latin America, who far outnumber the Cuban migrants. People from poor countries will try to get into rich countries. There's nothing interesting or controversial about that.

      The Cubans do a pretty decent job with not many resources, and they still find the means to send a bunch of doctors to help even poorer people. I'd rather be poor in Cuba than in any other Latin American country. At least in Cuba someone would be looking out for me when I couldn't help myself.

      What many in the US cannot understand is that most Cubans genuinely like Fidel. They don't necessarily look at the US and wonder why they aren't like them, but rather look at countries like Mexico, Jamaica and Colombia and thank God that they aren't like them.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    44. Re:Property by DJCacophony · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, there aren't any oil wells in America owned by Iraqi businesses that the United States subsequently seized and nationalized.

      --
      Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
    45. Re:Property by sumdumass · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Cuba is so special because We liberated it from the Spanish not too long ago. Teddy Roosevelt and his rough riders were parts of the fight. Things went along somewhat well and the US had a lot of international business relations with it then all the sudden, Castro takes over in a revolution then confiscates all the businesses and their assets which included quite a bit of US wealth. They then allowed the USSR places missile basses in Cuba specifically to threaten the domestic US Soil.

      Kennedy, the great one who swam the sex pool with Marylin Monroe , not the drunken prostitute killer, took care of the Missile problem with the USSR directly by more or less saying if you place nukes there we will consider it an act of war and respond in kind (Of course Kennedy knew at the time that Russia didn't have the ability to hit the US outside of basses in Cuba). We sent navy ships down to blockade the access from Russia to Cuba and Russia turned the ships around. Ever since then, Castro has maintained a negetive and threatening stand towards us and we have obliged him back.

      The paranoia, which existed well before the DHS existed, was somewhat founded in real events. Carter attempted to lessen the embargo effect in the late 70's by not renewing or seeking the renewal of a key act of the embargo which Castro thanked us by Putting all his crazies and criminals (most of whom were imprisoned for speaking against the Government of Cuba) in rafts and pushing them out to see hopefully to land in America. Reagan restored the embargo. In the 90's, Cuba used mig fighters supplied by the old USSR to shoot down unarmed Cessna airplanes operated by an American group called Brothers to the Rescue who searched the sea by air and attempted to send help to Cubans on rafts attempting to make it to America. In 2000 or so, we relaxed some agriculture export laws to help assist food going to Cuba after a hurricane hurt them pretty bad. Castro refused US aid but suggested a one time purchase of food with was orchestrated for pennies in the dollar to assist in aid without Castro biting his pride. There has been calls to loosen the embargo ever since.

      So you see, it isn't without justification and it isn't the DHS who instituted the policy. But when Castro was in power, he was a threat to the security of the US and done some things simply out of Spite to the US. What I presented was a very one sided, very short, and incomplete set of reasons for the current political attitude towards Cuba today. Our attitude towards them may not be reasonable but it isn't without cause. Hopefully, Castro's replacement which is probably going to be his brother who is a little more ruthless, is a little smarter in his attitude and interactions with the US. Then maybe we can get over this once and for all.

    46. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, there were oil wells in Iraq owned by the nation of Iraq that the United States seized and privatized. The new owners being oh-so-conveniently US-based corporations.

    47. Re:Property by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I can quite believe that Mao and Lenin resembled the Tsars and Emperors they replaced and that Communism was a state religion.

      But that doesn't mean that the US should treat them in the same way. New religions intolerant religions like Communism have a need to spread. And Communism was a much worse system than the ones it replaced. E.g. Russia before the revolution had secret police and prison camps, this is true. But after the revolution the death rate due to political violence rose astronomically. Someone worked out that the Tsar killed a few hundred people for political crimes. But the Russian communists killed many millions. And the old regimes in Russia and China were not expansionist in the sense that they wanted to spread their system around the world. E.g. Russian communism came very close to engulfing all of the US's allies in Western Europe as well as Eastern Europe. Communism in Asia actually managed it. The whole world could quite easily have ended up resembling Orwell's 1984. This is something which US foreign policy, like its UK counterpart absolutely cannot let happen because of the danger of being completely surrounded by countries which are essentially hostile slave states.

      The old state religions in China and Russia were also not monotheistic - they each tolerated Buddhism and Christianity (and Islam in places) in their empires. Lastly, both of them had started to liberalise. If the Communists hadn't hijacked the process, it's quite possible that they would have ended up as something much more liberal.

      So whilst it's true to say that their is a degree of continuity the post revolutionary powers were a lot more threatening than the pre revolutionary ones. And it seems like US foreign policy should be about strangling new murderous monotheisms if possible, not accepting them as a permanent fixture.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    48. Re:Property by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      Straw man. Rephrase your question so that it's remotely meaningful, "Can you explain why more people want to immigrate from poor European countries to the US, rather than to rich European countries," and the simple answer is that the US is much easier to immigrate to for people lacking qualifications than any well off European country. We've built our nation on the notion of immigration, and it continues to be one of our strengths. Then ask yourself the next question: how many people who are able to move from a country like England or France to the US, compared to the other way around. In my experience there's no imbalance on that front, and certainly no particular desire among any well-off Europeans I know (and yes, I know a few) to cross the pond.

    49. Re:Property by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Russia is only 55 miles away"

      The Bering Straight is far more dangerous to cross, there's nobody on their side living near it, and have you seen the military presence in Nome and the Aleutians?

      "Canada is even closer."

      Canadians are fat and happy. It's the Mexicans that are making a run on the border and, consequently, it's Mexican politics that the State Department is far more concerned with.

      "As far as I can tell, the department of homeland security is staffed by a bunch of paranoid Nazis."

      Were the 1990's so long ago? Thanks to protests in Havana and the wake of a coup in Haiti, in 1994 the Coast Guard alone interdicted 64,382 boat people. Heck, according to the New York Times, the Coast Guard picked up over 1200 on a single day. Just because the Caribbean has been relatively quiet in your young life doesn't mean these things never happened in the past or will not happen in the future.

      There are going to be some late nights this week for the higher ups in the Florida Department of Military Affairs.

    50. Re:Property by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My point isn't that Containment was in and of itself a bad policy, but rather that it was an unnuanced policy. Its application was oversimplified; dividing the world into the infamous three; the First, Second and Third Worlds. From a strategic point of view it was a blunder. China was not naturally the USSR's ally. Yes, Stalin had ingratiated himself in a big way with the Communists in the 1930s, but Mao was no more interested in China being a Soviet satellite than he wanted it to be a Western satellite. He did reach out to the US after the defeat of the Nationalists, mainly because he was a bright enough guy to know that he didn't want any enemies. The US, in a growing anti-Communist paranoia, backed the Nationalists instead, despite the fact that the Nationalists had completely lost the mainland and were doing nothing more than playing at being the government of China.

      I don't think China and the US would ever have been fast friends. China was too bruised by a century of domination by foreign powers (including the US) for that. But the US completely fucked it up by rejecting Mao and hanging their socks on a washed up tyrant; Chang Kai-shek and his utterly routed Nationalists. It forced Mao completely into the Soviet sphere (though that lasted a little over a decade), because Mao needed someone's help.

      The fact is that Chinese Communism was not the same as Stalinism, though in the 1950s, with the disasterous Great Leap Forward, it certainly became much worse. Maybe the US could have done nothing about that even if it had built ties with Mao, but by essentially treating the PRC as some sort of alien inhabiting government, it lost all capability. It also violated one of the key notions of international diplomacy, that one must remain pragmatic in all things. It was a reality-defying leap of stupidity that only made sense within the context of domestic US politics at the time. It certainly made no sense within the contexts of diplomacy, international relations, international law and within the long-term interests of the US in the Far East, and ultimately the world. Nixon's normalization, while the right thing to do, has put the US in an even trickier situation as per Taiwan, which it treats as a defacto state, while all the while trying to play it with the PRC. If the US had simply admitted that Chang Kai-shek was a spent force and recognized Mao, this awkard position could have been avoided.

      As to Cuba, rejecting Castro is only a lesser blunder because Cuba is a smaller and less important nation. Still, once again, the Red Fever created a situation in which reality was denied and a Communist government was forced into bed with the Soviets.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    51. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriousy though, I lived in various parts of the Caribbean during the 1980s and saw first-hand the influence of American foreign policy, particularly in Grenada. Once you have viewed human rights abuses on the scale that the US puppet Gairy perpetrated, it's not particularly easy to forget.

      Nor were the positive changes once he'd been kicked out - in healthcare, education, infrastructure, rule of law etc. clear evidence of which i also witnessed first hand.

      As you might imagine, this before/after picture was about as stark as you can get, and made me seriously question a lot of what i believed about the West and its role in the world.

      Obviously there are some Cubans (in Miami) who will disagree with me, they'll probably want a return to the days of Batista: the drug crime, the desperate poverty, the corruption and oppression that is almost inevitable when the Americans "bring democracy" to a country.

      In my experience most Cubans know this and thus I strongly suspect nothing much will change in Cuba. For any right-minded individual that's got to be a good thing.

    52. Re:Property by immcintosh · · Score: 1
      Assuming you're not being completely sarcastic... (honestly have no idea)

      Democratic governments are supported by taxation--the theft of income from the individual to support the state. Democratic states are thieves. Capitalism implies mandatory work in order for the individual to provide for him or herself the means to survive under capitalism. Capitalists are slavers.

      Slave owning thieves qualify as evil in my book.

      I can do it too! When it comes down to it, all states take from the people to some degree. All states require work from the people to some degree. Calling it thievery and slavery is naive. The only important question is what comes of it, and how much it impinges on individual freedom, at least if you're only concerned with the ethical aspects.

      Socialism relies on the nationalization of the means of production and the state planning of production.
      This statement seems to rest on the unstated assumption that there is a natural right to property ownership. I contend that there is no such natural right, and it exists only insofar as it is enforced by the state, or lacking the state, by individual force.

    53. Re:Property by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Then why have we so consistently over the last several decades acted in ways that *destabilize* the Cuban government?"

      Um... because the sooner Castro goes away, the sooner the boat people stop swamping south Florida like they did in 1980 and 1994? Even the number of Hatians we've had to process and repatriate comes in a distant second to the number of Cubans.

      Happy people don't try to emigrate.

    54. Re:Property by Arthur+B. · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Democratic governments are supported by taxation--the theft of income from the individual to support the state. Democratic states are thieves.
      Correct, to a greater extent when they have socialist policies.

      Capitalism implies mandatory work
      Nope. Physical laws implies that you have to work to get things, that's hardly slavery. Mandatory means someone forces you to do something.

      I can do it too!
      Well you tried, but you failed

      This statement seems to rest on the unstated assumption that there is a natural right to property ownership , and it exists only insofar as it is enforced by the state, or lacking the state, by individual force.
      Whether a right exists or not is independent of its enforcement, I am talking about de jure right, not de facto. There is indeed a natural right to property arising from our nature as rational being. Property is the extension of justice defining the legitimate party in conflicts arising on limited resources. If there is a just order then it must define a set of property rights, thereby the existence of private property is equivalent to the existence of justice. Besides, your argument would make a defense of communism, not socialism which the parent was advocating over communism.
      --
      \u262D = \u5350
    55. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cuba is so special because We liberated it from the Spanish not too long ago.

      The USA took Cuba as the spoils of a war of aggression.

      the US had a lot of international business relations with it

      The USA propped up a brutal dictator, who returned the favour by stealing land and resources from the poor to give to US businesses in exchange for bribes.

      all the sudden, Castro takes over in a revolution

      "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"

      confiscates all the businesses and their assets which included quite a bit of US wealth

      The new Castro government used the legal doctrine of eminent domain to return to the people that which had been wrongfully taken from them.

      They then allowed the USSR

      The new Castro regime made overtures to the USA before turning to the USSR. The USA rebuffed the new Cuban government.

      places missile basses in Cuba specifically to threaten the domestic US Soil

      The Soviet placement of nuclear missiles in Cuba was in direct response to the USA putting nuclear missiles in Turkey which were able to hit Moscow with almost no warning. The US missile bases were in Turkey first and it was only when the US refused to even discuss their presence, that the USSR moved missiles into Cuba.


      See I can give a slanted view of history too. That is only your first paragraph; I could go on. It all depends upon whether you close your right eye and squint through your left; or close your left and squint through your right.


      You might want to dig a little to find the truth, to find which lies are closer to it.



      Peter

      (who doesn't post often enough to bother to get a Slashdot ID)
    56. Re:Property by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      Put simply, the US fails at the Prisoner's Dillema.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    57. Re:Property by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 1

      *reads your post*

      I wub roo...

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    58. Re:Property by Flambergius · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry but any Cuban history summarization of three or more words must include the word Batista. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_Batista

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers - Pablo Picasso
    59. Re:Property by foetusinc · · Score: 1

      And everyone else has been perfect little angels the last half century? Maybe you should reread my post. World politics have always been a mess, and will always be a mess. This is not a new phenomenon. The end of the Cold War just brought it all back into the open. 50 years of operating with a nuclear threat meant making some very ugly decisions by everyone involved, and it will be a very long time before anyone can unravel all the repercussions. Welcome to the 3rd millennium.

    60. Re:Property by khallow · · Score: 1

      Why do you think that? Castro could have sided with the USSR and still have gone the route of a democracy. As I see it, instead he clung on to power till he was at death's door. Actions speak louder than words.

    61. Re:Property by jrentona · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't see how you can say the US "forced" China to ally with the USSR without failing to understand communism and modern history.

      A big part of marxism is the idea of inevitable revolution. The US, with its emphasis on freedom and traditional laissez-faire tendencies basically represents a bouguosie state in the eyes of the Marxist. In that sense, almost by definition, the governments of the United States and the West were the enemy. For the revolution to take the form that Marx predicted; bouguosie governments must fall to give way to the universal rule of one world proletariate utopia. Your assessment of America's fear (whether justified or not) of a unified communist menace is not the fault of the United States. You just have to read a few paragraphs of the communist and marxist playbooks to realize that. It wasn't any over-idealism or parranoia on our part at work in the Cold War. We simply took them at their word.

      On top of this, there are the obvious similarities in tactics that party leaders in communist governments share. They all seem without question to align themselves with Stalinist tactics to maintain control. This totalitarian mindset makes it naturally easier for these governments (Cuba, North Korea, China, etc...) to relate to each other. I think Mao would have a lot more to discuss with Stalin than he would with Roosevelt and Eisenhour simply from a philosophical perspective. For that reason alone, they were natural allies.

      Besides, the US historically invested in a free China before and during World War II. We had Flying Tiger squadrons fighting the Japanese in China for Chang Kai Shek throughout the war. What were we supposed to do, abandon these people? For what?

      Not to mention the American blood spilled in the Korean conflict when the Chinese crossed the river into Korea much to the surprise of General Macarthur.

      Mao was not the innocent victim of the United States that you depict. He was responsible for 10's of millions of mass murders during the Cultural Revolution. He learned quite well from Stalin's butchery. The US should be MORE selective about the people we jump into bed with, not less.

    62. Re:Property by Grygus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      China's not communist despite the trappings of a communist regime. They are extremely capitalistic. This doesn't necessarily change your point because it is still a potential economic threat if you choose to view it in such a light, but I think it's an important distinction.

    63. Re:Property by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 2, Informative

      Brothers to the Rescue violated Cuban airspace. Havana had intelligence indicating a possible military operation. They fucked up, but understandably so. It's not like the US would never fire on a civilian plane.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    64. Re:Property by belnark · · Score: 1

      I believe the following clip helps sum-up the U.S.'s masterful middle-east foreign policy...

      America to the Rescue!

    65. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You missed a couple...
      • Allende in Chile (it's been pretty well substantiated that the Pinochet's coup was CIA backed).
      • Jaime Roldos and Omar Torrijos (who you referenced, though not by name, when you mentioned the CIA backing Norriega's rise to power) are also pretty likely candidates. Both died in plane crashes after rebuffing repeated attempts on the part of the US, among others, to exploit their country's natural resource (oil in Ecuador, the canal in Panama).
      IMHO, your use of 'assassinated' was more than warranted.

      Basically point to any trouble spot today and you can find US meddling in the recent past.
      FWIW, if you look beyond the recent past, you're more than likely going to find significant meddling on the part of one of the European powers. From the Spanish in South America to the British in the Middle East to the French in Southeast Asia, a lot of the current problems can be traced back further than US involvement. None of this justifies any of the US meddling, but it is worth noting that the US has only picked up where Europe left off.
    66. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're out of your mind (if you have one). The Iraqi oil is owned by Iraq, and even now the revenue from their oil is being distributed as fairly as possible amongst the various religious sects. If you have proof otherwise, post it here.

    67. Re:Property by Morosoph · · Score: 1

      You win the epic short-sightedness award!
      If the state reinstates property rights and redistributes property to the people, one generation later, the people will have voluntarily sold the property to international developers.
      And what's so bad about that? They'll have traded their way to that position. The point isn't to stop capitalism, but to ensure that Cubans have a reasonable starting position, and an incentive to take what should be theirs from the government.
    68. Re:Property by Descalzo · · Score: 1

      It *would* have become a free, democratic nation if we hadn't originally spruned Castro's overtures of friendship.
      First of all, it irks me that it is somehow impossible in this world to become a free, democratic nation without the USA's friendship. Then I hear about how we need to stay the smeg out of everyone's business.

      But as to your assertion of Castro's non-communist beginnings, check this out. It's the first one I could find. Google suggests this might contain a counterpoint, but I can't access it.

      If you have anything to back up your assertion, let us know.

      I remember reading something about this in Skousen's The Naked Communist, but as I don't own that one I can't tell you what exactly it says.

      People say the same thing about Ho Chi Minh, that he was just out to unite the country, and if we'd just been nice to him we'd all be friends and float around like angels, but I don't buy it.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    69. Re:Property by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > The US should push for Cuban property to be given (or sold) to the Cuban population.

      Sold, maybe. Not given. I know, giving the stuff to the people sounds good on the surface, but economically speaking, in terms of the actual results, populism is even worse than communism. Yes, really. Communism creates surplusses and shortages, which is not good, but populism invariably creates multi-digit inflation, which is worse. This scenario has played out numerous times in other Latin American countries, and Cuba would not be wise to follow in their footsteps. Look at what happened in Zimbabwe when the government redistributed land to more of the population. Look at what happened in Argentina each time property was redistributed. Look at what happened in Brazil. Spreading the wealth out to the poor _sounds_ real nice, but the results are consistently not good.

      According to Adam Smith and Alan Greenspan, the most important thing (in economic terms) that the government needs to do is to protect personal property rights, i.e., to make sure that people and companies can keep the money that they earn (and the assets that they build) or spend it as they see fit. (Obviously there are things that the government needs to do for other, non-ecomonic reasons, but this is the economists' perspective on what needs to be done.) When property rights are secure, the markets function.

      If there's a second economic thing the government needs to do, in my opinion, it is to provide a stable currency.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    70. Re:Property by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But the US completely fucked it up by rejecting Mao and hanging their socks on a washed up tyrant; Chang Kai-shek and his utterly routed Nationalists. It forced Mao completely into the Soviet sphere (though that lasted a little over a decade), because Mao needed someone's help ...
      It also violated one of the key notions of international diplomacy, that one must remain pragmatic in all things. It was a reality-defying leap of stupidity that only made sense within the context of domestic US politics at the time. It certainly made no sense within the contexts of diplomacy, international relations, international law and within the long-term interests of the US in the Far East, and ultimately the world. Nixon's normalization, while the right thing to do, has put the US in an even trickier situation as per Taiwan, which it treats as a defacto state, while all the while trying to play it with the PRC. If the US had simply admitted that Chang Kai-shek was a spent force and recognized Mao, this awkward position could have been avoided.

      Yeah, but foreign policy is not a game and you don't just make friends with the winners.

      Mao killed millions of people, more than Hitler and Chang Kai Shek ran Taiwan quite well and eventually his son allowed it to democratise. Admittedly mostly due to pressure from the Taiwanese people and the US, but Mao's successors dealt with peaceful protests in favour of democracy by running people over with tanks. And this incidentally was at a point when relations with the US were at their warmest, in fact China and the US were allies against the USSR.

      So sucking up to tyranny doesn't cause it to moderate its behaviour. Which is as you'd expect really - when the student protests erupted in 1989, it's hard to imagine that the people that decided to kill them really gave any thought whatsoever to the reaction of the US. So an alliance with the PRC doesn't moderate its behaviour. But an alliance with Taiwan does have give the US something. It's also morally right.

      Let's try to use your policy in Europe in 1940. Clearly the US should ally with Stalin and Hitler since they controlled a lot of territory. Poland, Czechoslovakia and so on were spent forces and should be ditched. Now you're no doubt thinking Godwin at this point, and by the rules of an Internet argument you're probably right. But outside the internet, it does seem a valid criticism of a potential foreign policy principle that it would cause you to back Stalin and Hitler over the governments of smaller and freer countries they had conquered or were about to conquer. Actually it would be totally catastrophic in other situations too. At one point Saddam Hussein occupied Kuwait and was militarily quite capable of overrunning Saudi Arabia. Your principle seems to be that once he took over, the US should recognize that and attempt to engage with him. To me it seems quite clear that the US should absolutely not allow him to stay in either Saudi Arabia or Kuwait.

      I actually think that the US should not have normalised with China and should not recognize hostile tyrannies in general. I wouldn't get into silly games like the Chinese do with Taiwan, but I would definitely regard those governments as essentially overgrown crime families rather than anyone you want to regard as being an equal. Certainly there is no point trying to form a relationship with them in the way that Nixon and Kissinger tried to do. The US lost out big time in that, and the PRC gained. But that government has by any reasonable standard far less legitimacy that the ROC one. Come to think of it it has far less legitimacy than the post Soviet Russian government, which can at least win a plebiscite every few years, even if it probably doesn't qualify as a full democracy anymore.

      I think the problem I have with international diplomacy is that most of the principles were invented long before the era of mass democracy. Then, at least by modern standards, very few governments were representative. So in the abse

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    71. Re:Property by Descalzo · · Score: 1
      From The Wizard of Id:

      INSPECTOR: How do like life in Id?

      PEASANT: I can't complain.

      INSPECTOR: Why not?

      PEASANT: It's forbidden.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    72. Re:Property by cas2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Kennedy [...] took care of the Missile problem with the USSR directly by more or less
      > saying if you place nukes there we will consider it an act of war and respond in kind


      actually, it was more like Kennedy said "OK, you've called our bluff. We'll remove our missiles from Turkey like you want, and you give up on putting yours in Cuba. And we'll get our newspapers to report it as if we forced you to back down, and you can get your newspapers to do the same for you".

      >But when Castro was in power, he was a threat to the security of the US

      don't be ridiculous. Castro was never any kind of a threat to U.S. security. He's just an embarrassment because he kicked out Batista and the other U.S.-backed gangsters in the fifties and took away the playground where U.S. Senators and Congressmen and businessmen could mingle with Mafia figures outside of the public eye. He's also an embarrassment because Cuba actually functions reasonably well as a socialist state, even despite the U.S. trade embargoes and other sanctions, and the assassination attempts and the various failed invasions. Castro never broke no matter what they did to him and to Cuba....that, they'll never forgive.

      Worst of all, Castro committed the crime of demonstrating that a South American state could exist without the malicious influence of the U.S. propping up dictators, backing fascists, and overthrowing democratically-elected socialist or socialist-leaning governments as they've done repeatedly for many decades - e.g. in Chile in the 70s or Nicaragua in the 80s, and as they'd like to do to Chavez now.

    73. Re:Property by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > *but* US should say out of Cuban politics for *many* reasons that have nothing to do with policeman of the world.

      I agree with some of your reasons, but not others.

      > 1. Cold War is over
      > 2. Communism is not a "threat" - it is a political/economic system that doesn't work

      Indeed. This is basically the same reason, two ways of saying the same thing. Nonetheless, it's a *good* reason. With the curtain down, the communist government of Cuba is not a problem for the US like it was during the cold war, and Cuba is not a large enough economy to matter very much one way or the other as a trading partner. The main impact of Cuba on the US is in the form of a steady trickle of immigrants, which on the whole is mostly a good thing.

      > 3. Cuba's communism is not as bad as many gov'ts that US has put in place because the countries in
      > question had *democratically* *elected* socialist governments. Peru is an example. Panama. Nicaragua.

      Panama wouldn't matter if they didn't have the canal, which they wouldn't have if the US hadn't done what we did. (I'm not saying what we did was right, but I am saying that if the current Panamanian government is a problem for the US it's only because we care about having access to the canal.)

      Anyway, your main point here seems to be that you believe the result, if the US were to intervene in Cuban politics, would be a worse government than what Cuba has now. I'll concede that's a possibility, but this is a much weaker argument than the first one, because, fundamentally, in terms of US interests, the government of Cuba doesn't matter, one way or the other. A worse government, quite frankly, wouldn't be a particularly worrisome outcome.

      > 4. China? China's communism and nationalism is a much larger threat than Cuba ever was

      I don't consider China a threat, but for very different reasons from Cuba.

      The Chinese have their own (decidedly Eastern) way of looking at the world, but they are looking at the same world we are looking at. They have their own (decidedly Eastern) way of refining their approach, but they _do_ refine it. When something they've been doing clearly doesn't work, they find a way to do it differently.

      China's form of communism is different from and more viable than Soviet communism precisely because it embraces things that were not part of the original plan, most notably property rights and market capitalism. (They don't have to _call_ them property rights and market capitalism. Indeed, didn't Deng Xiaoping call it "socialism with Chinese characteristics"? Whatever, it still works.)

      It is taking time, but China is, by experimentation, figuring out what they need to do, and doing it, just as the major Western economic powerhouses have done and are doing. That's not Soviet communism. Soviet communism stuck doggedly to Marxist central planning until the economy of Eastern Europe had completely collapsed, and only then they started looking at alternatives. China's approach is different, and, quite frankly, more intelligent: rather than running with a non-working system until it runs into the ground, they are reinventing the system piece by piece so that it works. Indeed, by the time they have finished reinventing it, I am convinced that Chinese communism won't really be recognizeable as communism (in the traditional sense of that word) at all.

      Of course, I do not now consider Soviet communism a threat either, because the world knows that it did not work. That's a very different reason. Cuba's irrelevance is due to that failure as well.

      Whereas, China's not being a threat is due to their ability to _succeed_, and to become a part of the global economy.

      > 5. Don't bring up the "Cuban Missile Crises"

      Irrelevant. The cold war is over.

      > 6. Batista was a corrupt ass and US in fifties were bunch of racists - Cuba's
      > revolution was the natural outcome of US's corrupt influence there at the time.
      > 7. Castro wasn't a

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    74. Re:Property by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well, I admitted it was incomplete and one sided. But it was still seen as an hostile action because the fighters passed the plane and saw it was unarmed.

      Also, you do realize that the link you presented was a peru jet fighter who shot down that plane right? The American portion was probably just as much at fault because they failed to relay the tail numbers of the plane to ground persons. But is wasn't actually the US who shot it down. I'm not saying or trying to diminished the role we had, but after the CIA agents discovered it was a legit flight, they attempted to intercept it and warn them which is more then what happened with the brothers to the rescue.

    75. Re:Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is when it becomes our issue. That is when we need to act to remove the interference, with no limit to the action required to remove it.

      Now, it's this kinda talk that gives the USA it's perceived violent character. Who on earth would mod this insightful?

      And hey, what's that I see? An amber alert besides your name? That tells me that you are one of the very few people on Slashdot who bothers to mark people you encounter as enemies. It shows that you are a true believer in the idea of "us and them" -- that some people out there are inherently worse than others and should be treated as such with no reflection as to why they seem that way and therefore continue to live in your own little deluded world of hate. Sux to be you...

    76. Re:Property by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      actually, it was more like Kennedy said "OK, you've called our bluff. We'll remove our missiles from Turkey like you want, and you give up on putting yours in Cuba. And we'll get our newspapers to report it as if we forced you to back down, and you can get your newspapers to do the same for you".
      that isn't exactly the story I got. But seeing how I have never heard of it, it would be hard to refute. Anyways,

      don't be ridiculous. Castro was never any kind of a threat to U.S. security. He's just an embarrassment because he kicked out Batista and the other U.S.-backed gangsters in the fifties and took away the playground where U.S. Senators and Congressmen and businessmen could mingle with Mafia figures outside of the public eye. He's also an embarrassment because Cuba actually functions reasonably well as a socialist state, even despite the U.S. trade embargoes and other sanctions, and the assassination attempts and the various failed invasions. Castro never broke no matter what they did to him and to Cuba....that, they'll never forgive.
      When he invited Russian nuclear missiles in to be aimed at the US, he was a threat. Your crazy if you can't see that. And no, the functioning of the socialist state, which has almost collapsed on several occasions was due to other countries propping them up. It wasn't anything done on their own.

      Worst of all, Castro committed the crime of demonstrating that a South American state could exist without the malicious influence of the U.S. propping up dictators, backing fascists, and overthrowing democratically-elected socialist or socialist-leaning governments as they've done repeatedly for many decades - e.g. in Chile in the 70s or Nicaragua in the 80s, and as they'd like to do to Chavez now.
      Lol.. I don't remember anything the US government has said about Chavez outside he is crazy. The truth of the matter is they don't sweat him at all. He is a raving lunatic who is pissed off at out EPA requirements for oxidized fuels that has effectively locked out his importation of refined fuels after Clinton brokered deals to build and maintain a supply line that they already built. That's why the had those two lawsuits that failed and you can trace his rantings and stupidity back to that. He acted like an aly until that even though people claim it was because of an coup attempt. BTW, it was the clean air act that Clinton also signed and became effective just before he left office.

      But I have to ask, what is you point besides ranting about the US? I already stated that what I said was a one sided incomplete accounting of the events.
    77. Re:Property by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      People say the same thing about Ho Chi Minh, that he was just out to unite the country, and if we'd just been nice to him we'd all be friends and float around like angels, but I don't buy it. Angels, probably not, but on friendly terms? Why not? We were backing him and his Viet Minh partisans when they were fighting the Japanese and turncoat Vichy French in WW2. They lobbied for the US to back an independent Vietnam after WW2, but the French threatened to pull out of NATO unless we backed their reestablishment of colonial rule in French Indochina. Uncle Ho was a communist, sure, but he was born in 1890. He was one of the early communists, which in many ways were much like our own founding fathers. Ho greatly admired Thomas Jefferson. Unfortunately, the influence of nasty, fucked up Stalinist communism turned North Vietnam into the same kind of creepy totalitarianism the Russians had.. Ho was by that time far too old to really be any more than a figurehead. If the US had told France to go piss up a rope back in the 50's, and Ho Chi Minh hadn't had to resort to playing footsie with the prick Russians, things might have turned out fairly nicely in Vietnam. Ho certainly wasn't wedded to international communism. He was, in fact, pretty much entirely a hard-core nationalist. Two quotes from him sum up his attitude pretty nicely:
      "I follow only one party: the Vietnamese party.""
      "It is better to sacrifice everything than to live in slavery!"

      I like good ol' Uncle Ho, and I'm a freakin' US Army veteran who joined the army in '87 to guard against a Russian invasion in Europe. Seriously, Ho wasn't your average dickwad commie hiding behind populist bullshit to justify declaring himself dictator (cough)Castro(cough). He was one of those rare people that spoke all that Leninist claptrap about equality and egalitarianism and meant it.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    78. Re:Property by mr100percent · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Easy, you're flat-out wrong.

      While the oil is owned by whoever bought the rights, the revenue is not being evenly distributed. ONe of the US benchmarks for the 2007 "surge" was that Iraq would pass oil-revenue sharing legislation, which didn't happen. The Kurds are trying to negotiate deals with oil companies, while the Iraq federal government is saying those deals are illegal. The Sunnis are being or will be dirt poor, since the oil is in the Kurdish north and Shiite south, and a federalist system would make them poorer.

    79. Re:Property by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      You are kidding me. Cuba is the pharmaceutical capital of South America, using cutting edge technology to research some new drugs. Where's your source?

    80. Re:Property by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      Isn't our policy to contain expansionist imperial powers? Your point that putting too much emphasis on an ultimately superficial ideology is valid, but then the implication is only that we engaged in the right policy for the wrong reason (and for all I know behind closed doors the reasoning behind containment was anti-imperialism not anti-communism). State religion Communism may have been, but that doesn't appear to imply that cooperation with China in the 50's and 60's would have been beneficial or even successful. What would we have done during the Great Leap Forward? Look the other way?

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    81. Re:Property by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      Can't we get some polls on this instead of mucking around with your personal anecdotes? Recall both that people can smile and still be unhappy, and that the U.S. is the nation with unwanted Cuban immigrants, not the other way around. So if someone with stronger Google-fu than I can find some data on how happy the average Cuban actually is, that would be much more useful than you saying you've been there and it seems happy to you. After all, Iraq seemed like a safe place to John McCain, so it's not like people can't read what they want into a population that they only superficially interact with.

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    82. Re:Property by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      You become a lot less insightful when one realizes that it is possible to point at ANY country and find the US meddling in its recent past. So guess what, I can also point at any _successful_ nation and find recent US intervention. Germany, France, UK, Japan, Italy, Canada, and all the other dozens I don't have room to list. So really what you're saying is that not everything has worked out for all nations of the world.

      No surprise there, and no need for the US as your super-villainous Bad Guy from whom all problems in the world stem.

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    83. Re:Property by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      Isolationism didn't work so well for us. Events within other nations, and between other nations can affect us. So what's the point in staying out of something that's going to affect and require our involvement. Your post isn't insightful, it's willfully ignorant. i going to go out on a limb and think it has something to with partisanship. i bet 8 years ago your tune would have been different on the same issue.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    84. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Your post isn't insightful, it's willfully ignorant. i going to go out on a limb and think it has something to with partisanship. i bet 8 years ago your tune would have been different on the same issue.

      No - what happened 8 years ago?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    85. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      So guess what, I can also point at any _successful_ nation and find recent US intervention. Germany, France, UK, Japan, Italy, Canada, and all the other dozens I don't have room to list.

      In what exactly has the US intervened in Canada to make it a better place? Imposing illegal tarrifs on our exports or trying to claim that our northern waters are now international because it now may be useful to them?

      No surprise there, and no need for the US as your super-villainous Bad Guy from whom all problems in the world stem.

      I like the US - great people and great country. However your foreign policy is a world menace - absolutely assinine. Maybe though the world will get a whole lot better if you stop voting republican.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    86. Re:Property by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      50 years of operating with a nuclear threat meant making some very ugly decisions by everyone involved, and it will be a very long time before anyone can unravel all the repercussions.

      Basically the entire world (except the US) realized right from the start that the war in Iraq was illegal and unjustified. The only weapons they had were the ones the US sold them to fight Iran. Noone else in the world understands what the US has against Cuba either.

      Assassinating world leaders and funding terrorists is not good foreign policy, I don't care what the reasons. Although if someone had taken out both Bushes and Regan before they could do the damage they did, the world would arguably be in a better place today.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    87. Re:Property by stm2 · · Score: 1

      Salvador Allende (Chile, 11 September 1973).

      --
      DNA in your Linux: DNALinux
    88. Re:Property by dajak · · Score: 1

      Let's try to use your policy in Europe in 1940. Clearly the US should ally with Stalin and Hitler since they controlled a lot of territory. Poland, Czechoslovakia and so on were spent forces and should be ditched.

      At one point Saddam Hussein occupied Kuwait and was militarily quite capable of overrunning Saudi Arabia. Your principle seems to be that once he took over, the US should recognize that and attempt to engage with him.

      In both examples territorial integrity was violated by *another* country. The point of TS is IMO about waiting for the smoke to settle after civil war and recognizing the winner. If external forces don't meddle, the side with more popular support is more likely to win. Do impose an economic blockade however on countries that have an economy that is inordinately dependent on exporting a single raw resource (oil, diamonds), because otherwise the civil war will be won by whomever starts out controlling the resource, certainly if they can keep buying superior weapons.

      Hitler's treatment of the jews would have made a better case, but we can be pretty sure that nobody would have gone to war on Germany just to save Germany's jews. Even today nobody would (think Darfur, Ruanda). There is a difference between liberating a country that was already stable before from a foreign oppressor, and interfering on behalf of the underdog in inherently unstable ones. In the first case you can immediately leave after you are finished throwing out the invader.

      I think the problem I have with international diplomacy is that most of the principles were invented long before the era of mass democracy. Then, at least by modern standards, very few governments were representative. So in the absence of democratic legitimacy territorial control is a reasonable principle. But times have changed, and it is quite possible for a thoroughly barbarous and hostile government to take over countries by sheer ruthlessness. But ruthlessness should not confer legitimacy, quite the reverse in fact.

      What difference does democracy make? Also in the past there were more and less ruthless governments, and governments that considered themselves more legitimate than their neighbours. The kingdom of France felt morally justified to attack the Dutch republic because it was clearly a misfit in the natural order of things. Protestant and Muslim polities were fair game for Catholic ones for the same reason. Prussia, Austria, and Russia divided the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth between them in the interest of civilization (everbody knew that Poles couldn't govern themselves and rampant Polish banditry made normal economic relations impossible). Piracy, human sacrifices, headhunting, etc. have been considered valid reasons for colonial powers to conquer backward native kingdoms.

      Look at the chronological list of NATO countries recognizing Kosovo's independence. Are the first ones the freest and most democratic? I don't think so. They are the *biggest* among the free and democratic. Many of the smaller ones have serious misgivings about this NATO-orchestrated violation of free and democratic Serbia's territorial integrity for the simple reason that they don't like the precedent it sets. The US ignores the rules of international diplomacy at times because it thinks it can get away with it, not because the rules have lost applicability for some reason.

      Back the less ruthless underdog generously, with no strings attached except that they must move towards full democracy over a decade or so if they do not already have it.

      Less ruthless and underdog don't necessarily go hand in hand. Take the Palestinians as an example: clearly the underdog, but capable of great ruthlessness.

    89. Re:Property by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      Sovereign countries have the right to democratically change any law they choose to, up to and including the seizure of assets owned, they really only have titles to those assets as defined by that sovereign government, which of course naturally any sovereign government can change.

      So quite simply, anybody can take a running leap, if they believe that owning assets in a foreign country somehow entitles them to defines it's laws, and take precedence over the rights of citizens within that country to define that countries laws as they deem fit.

      Changes in laws in one of the risks in investing in foreign countries. of course the US has an extremely vile and bloody record in allowing exploitative US corporations to direct foreign policy, when those corporation feel that their profits are at risk, which has lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens. Cuba only needs to look at Puerto Rico as a warning to what it is to be exploited third class citizens.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    90. Re:Property by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I almost think that doing that exact opposite of what you suggest is a better policy. Back the less ruthless underdog generously, with no strings attached except that they must move towards full democracy over a decade or so if they do not already have it. Oppose the ruthless imperialist powers as much as you can. In Saddam's case that would mean invading and removing him, in China or the USSR's case it means containment since a war would be a very bad idea.


      The US did just that. They've given billions to Taiwan since 1949. Did it help one bit in the Nationalists regaining China? Nope. Did it bring democracy to China? Nope. In fact, it wasn't until after the Generalissimo's death that Taiwan itself started to become a functioning democracy. Did the isolation of China, particularly after the final falling out with the USSR, help the Chinese people? Nope. In the end Containment itself required that the US recognize the PRC, because China was the best obstacle to Soviet dominance in the Central and East Asia. Do you think that just happened, that Kissinger just dreamed that up?

      The US did blunder. It had a chance to supplant the USSR as China's ally during that critical period in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Mao had beaten the Nationalists, partly because Chang Kai-shek and his goons were hardly freedom-loving people; they were corrupt, violent and utterly unsympathetic to the interests of anyone outside the main cities and treaty ports. It wasn't Mao that kicked the bastard out, it was pretty much all of China that did.

      Unfortunately, international affairs does mean pragmatism. It also means facing reality. Chang Kai-shek had absolutely no chance after he was booted off the mainland of ever regaining China. He was so bad that he probably did more to turn China red than Mao ever did.

      I'm not trying to excuse Mao. Mao was a ruthless egomaniacal lunatic. His regime also suffered from precisely the same structural flaws that his Imperial predecessors had; he was living in a sort information bubble. There's some suggestion that he had his subordinates in the Party from top to bottom so afraid of him that they didn't report the number of deaths. Mao is probably the single most successful (though I'd accidental) mass murderer in history, and today, while the State mantra still requires some sort of obeissance to him, just about everything Mao ever stood for has been discarded.
      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    91. Re:Property by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That's a possible hypothesis. I'm not going to believe it without a lot more reliable information. (Did you notice that your linked article carries the note "citation needed"?)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    92. Re:Property by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Did you notice the "citation needed" note was on neither the number of refugees nor the impetus of their flight? Or do you also like to insist that evolution is "just a theory?"

    93. Re:Property by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      The USA took Cuba as the spoils of a war of aggression.
      Besides posting as an AC, you just lost any credibility here. Cuba was repatriated accordingly.

      The USA propped up a brutal dictator, who returned the favour by stealing land and resources from the poor to give to US businesses in exchange for bribes.
      By propped up I assume you mean we didn't object and had relations with him. Sure, this is true and yet it isn't a crime either.

      "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"
      So what's your point? that wasn't the problem in any accounts I know of. It is what happened later.

      The new Castro government used the legal doctrine of eminent domain to return to the people that which had been wrongfully taken from them.
      Lol.. No he didn't. Unless you mean returning to the people as in keeping it for the state. He didn't return anything to anyone.

      The Soviet placement of nuclear missiles in Cuba was in direct response to the USA putting nuclear missiles in Turkey which were able to hit Moscow with almost no warning. The US missile bases were in Turkey first and it was only when the US refused to even discuss their presence, that the USSR moved missiles into Cuba.
      Well, no it wasn't a direct response. Nikita Khrushchev didn't bring that up until it was clear that we would goto war to remove them. But that is besides the point, Castro could have simply said no. He didn't so he was a threat.

      See I can give a slanted view of history too. That is only your first paragraph; I could go on. It all depends upon whether you close your right eye and squint through your left; or close your left and squint through your right.
      Well, at least you admitted is was incomplete and slanted too.

      You might want to dig a little to find the truth, to find which lies are closer to it.
      Umm.. I'm not concerned with actual history at this stage, it is the percieved history that effected American policy and shaped the current situation with Cuba. Finding out later that we were wrong for whatever reason doesn't address the GP who didn't know why we were involved and acting the way we are in the first place. Those were the stated and beliefs reasons at the time and the mindset of the policy makers which is why there is an embargo in the first place. It is also why the embargo is still present today, not because of a paranoid DHS.

      (who doesn't post often enough to bother to get a Slashdot ID)
      You should get an ID. I have a feeling we would have a lot of fun together. I don't think we would disagree on much either. You seem to like to play devils advocate as much as I do. My comments on this was only intended to give the GP an idea of why, not to be an actual factual post. Although I don't feel as strong about dictators (brutal or not) as others. The same people who would say we need to stay out of other countries business would also say we couldn't work with or do anything that could support a dictator. I have seen them do it personally, they appear to be mostly upset about US not getting involved in the causes they think matter most- even though they would never admit to it when doing it.
    94. Re:Property by Descalzo · · Score: 1
      Ho Chi Minh was a communist, first and last. He was a founding member of the French Communist Party in 1920. He got frostbite waiting to see Lenin's body in 1924. In 1930, when he started the Vietnamese Communist Party, it was said outright that the Vietnamese Communist Party belonged to the revolutionary camp led by the Soviet Union. The overtly stated purpose was to overthrow the "counterrevolutionary camp of international capitalism and imperialism whose general staff is the League of Nations."

      He was sent by the international communist party to start Communist Parties in Siam, Malaya, and Singapore. When Yugoslavia tried to shake off the Soviets in the late 40s, Ho Chi Minh was critical of Tito for putting nationalism ahead of Communism.

      If he ever stated that he was going to be (or willing to be) the buddy of the USA, then he did so the same way the communists have done it in other countries: as a lie, or as a convenient truce before they carried out their true purpose: enslavement in the name of brotherhood.

      In 1930, Ho Chi Minh succesfully started an insurrection in northern Vietnam. He immediately started murdering (sorry, executing, as you can't murder someone if you're a communist) officials and landlords.

      Maybe he did mean all that stuff from Lenin. That may make him one shade less bad. But to say that he was a nationalist first denies the vast majority of every action he ever performed his whole life.

      Now, suppose I am wrong. Suppose the US and Ho Chi Minh could have been friends. Then that would have been the one and only time in history that a communist leader truly wanted what was best for his country and was committed to a moral and honest rule, without resorting to endless bloodshed, forced impoverishment, and truly amazing propaganda in order to maintain the rule of the party leaders over their 'equal' 'brothers.'

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    95. Re:Property by QMO · · Score: 1

      How long has the "pharmaceutical capital of South America" been outside South America?

      Does this mean that I can claim that the German-speaking capital of the United States is Berlin? Or the tropical capital of Antarctica is Aruba? Or the bagel-eating capital of Europe is New York City?

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    96. Re:Property by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 1

      fair enough. But it IS a Major center for south america's pharmaceuticals and has perhapsspme of the best healthcare provided to the continent (lots of people go to Cuba for medical care)

    97. Re:Property by Descalzo · · Score: 1

      No. He's okay with what he said. USA is the money capital of Mexico. Wendover, NV is the lottery ticket capital of Utah. And so on.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    98. Re:Property by dbrutus · · Score: 1

      That's the real tragedy of places like Cuba. In Romania, where I was born, they were exporting food while people went hungry. There were goods to be had, but mostly in dollar shops where normal people couldn't go. You'd think that after the iron curtain went down and 300M people were liberated and could tell their stories, the old communist propaganda wouldn't work anymore. You're post proves that wrong.

    99. Re:Property by dbrutus · · Score: 1

      If you've got hard currency to spend, the communist system wants *you*. That's nothing new.

      They provide great service by impoverishing their domestic services and give subsidized foreigners some good care so they can get $$$ that's actually worth something on the world market. So yes, you can get good care in Cuba but for every x foreign patients treated well, an extra y cubans get treated badly or not at all and in communism, the y is always greater than the x. You're only seeing the x. If you try to find out about the other half of the equation, you'll find that Cuba's security apparat wants to have a chat with you. It will not be a friendly chat.

  52. No problem. by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 1

    If you want more information about zombies, I strongly recommend the Zombie Survival Guide. And a good bolt-action rifle. And a crowbar for close work. :)

    1. Re:No problem. by Notquitecajun · · Score: 1

      No, you need something semi-automatic, at minimum...or a shotgun. Bolt-actions would be good for sniping, but not when those suckers get too close. I suggest an AK-47 or SKS...cheap ammo, easy to use, and easy to maintain.

    2. Re:No problem. by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 1

      I'll let my wife carry the AK. As far as I'm concerned, if they're close enough to use an AK or a submachine gun, then they're too fucking close.

    3. Re:No problem. by Notquitecajun · · Score: 1

      We're talking about zombies and not commies, right?

      Come to think of it...it's a zombie commie!...Or Fidel would want to be a Commie Zombie...

      /ducks

  53. KKK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If KKK members were being held in this manner in Mexico, I do not think you would be so quick to jump to their defense.

    1. Re:KKK by polar+red · · Score: 1

      who says so? I want democracy for everybody (which includes for me: no death penalty, no torture, noone held without a wriiten accusation, right of representation, ...)

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  54. News for nerds? by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

    I would have liked to be told that he is long dead and his last one and a half year videos were a Primeval spinoff (after all, in a way he's a dinosaur).

  55. Did he really? by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I do not defend Castro's dictatorship, but for many he seems to have been a 'benevolent' dictator. This is something of an oxymoron, so what I mean is this: For many working class Cubans, Castro's government has established a strong safety net and an egalitarian society. There is no question that Castro was also ruthless in dealing with political adversaries and I would not have liked to live in such a closed society. But like any other government, his was neither purely good nor purely evil. What did he do well and what did he do poorly? He did work hard to address the needs of 'his' people. A controlled economy with a strong safety net does result in an economy with a lower average income, but how strongly does is affect the median income? Is it better to be an average Cuban or an average Mexican? Both seem to be willing to take great risks to get out. GDP per capita, the standard measure of a nation's economy, doesn't address income distribution: The average income of Bill Gates and 9 Slashdotters is simply 10% of Bill Gates income + round off error. I would like to see economic analysis of developing nations that is measured by percent of population living below a locally adjusted poverty line. Does anyone know of such a study?

    --
    Think global, act loco
    1. Re:Did he really? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      A benevolent dictator would be someone in the mold of Pinochet. Takes control at the behest of the Congress and Supreme Court, modernizes and updates the entire country's systems (infrastructure, economy, and political organization), then voluntarily steps down when it's done.

      Fidel is no Pinochet - there never was any effort to move towards open political or economic systems, and no one got ahead save those who were close and completely loyal to Fidel.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    2. Re:Did he really? by grassy_knoll · · Score: 1
      Just how much are you willing to overlook for income equality?

      From Human Rights Watch:

      Cuba remains a Latin American anomaly: an undemocratic government that represses nearly all forms of political dissent. President Fidel Castro, now in his forty-seventh year in power, shows no willingness to consider even minor reforms. Instead, his government continues to enforce political conformity using criminal prosecutions, long- and short-term detentions, mob harassment, police warnings, surveillance, house arrests, travel restrictions, and politically-motivated dismissals from employment. The end result is that Cubans are systematically denied basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, privacy, movement, and due process of law.


      To achieve your goals, are imprisoning all who disagree with you strictly required?

      When it comes to things like social safety net, income distribution, et. al. I think we're asking "under which system would I rather live?".

      If that's the case, I don't see many people from the US trying to get into Cuba.
    3. Re:Did he really? by w000t · · Score: 1

      You seem to have forgotten the 2000 executions. And the fact that, unlike Castro, he stepped in to "free" the country from an elected government (but Allende was a socialist, so must've been bad). After all, Latin American dictatorships of the time with their ideological cleansing were supported by the U.S., so they must've been good guys....

    4. Re:Did he really? by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      A benevolent dictator would be someone in the mold of Pinochet. Takes control at the behest of the Congress and Supreme Court, modernizes and updates the entire country's systems (infrastructure, economy, and political organization), then voluntarily steps down when it's done.

      And then spends the rest of his life trying to avoid being hanged for crimes against humanity.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    5. Re:Did he really? by STrinity · · Score: 1

      Castro's government has established a strong safety net and an egalitarian society.
      Yes, nothing's more egalitarian than a society where everyone's equally poor.
      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    6. Re:Did he really? by hao3 · · Score: 1

      gini coefficient, kuznet's 'U',.. I've seen data for Cuba on those and it's reliable too, just search Google Scholar.. Undergrad. level Development Economics stuff..

      --
      "Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance." - G.K. Chesterton
    7. Re:Did he really? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      See, I lived in Chile for the better part of 2 years. Pinochet didn't "step in" to free the country, he was ASKED to overthrow Allende by the Congress AND the Supreme Court, after Allende dissolved both because they opposed Allende's plan to nationalize everything.

      Sure, Pinochet killed 2,000 people; a lot, but still a piker compared to Castro. But 99% of the Chileans I met, worked with, and befriended would say that Pinochet will answer to God for what he did, but there is no denying he wasn't good for Chile.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    8. Re:Did he really? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Interesting to note that Pinochet lived in Chile as a free man, even after he voluntarily stepped down and turned Chile back to the Congress and a newly elected President.

      It was only when he went overseas that he was "arrested" for crimes against humanity. Seems his own people weren't too upset with him.

      Spend a year or two in Chile, and talk to the people about that time. You'll get a pretty dramatically different view than what you read about and hear about outside of Chile.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    9. Re:Did he really? by Johnny5000 · · Score: 1

      Spend a year or two in Chile, and talk to the people about that time. You'll get a pretty dramatically different view than what you read about and hear about outside of Chile.

      I guess only speaking to Chileans whose families were murdered by the Pinochet regime would present a biased picture of things. There are millions of Chileans whose families *weren't* murdered, and they're in the majority.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
  56. Obviously written by someone from Miami by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been many times to Cuba and the other islands around.
    I would put Jamaica, Haiti and the Dominican Republic closer to US inner cities than to Cuba.
    Sure, its not like where we live on some levels but compared to the rest fo the world, Cuba is good to live in.

    My friend had an accident there and cut her tendons. 10 mins after getting to the hospital she was taken to the op room. WHen she went back to Canada, it would have taken so long to get the follow up procedure that she went back to Cuba to get it done.
    They might not have the latest in technology but neither did my uncle when he was a doctor in the 40-50's but they sure have a buttload of doctors.

    If I was living in US inner cities, I would trade for Cuba in a heartbeat. That no voting part is a small price to pay (when you see our Kerry/Bush choices, maybe its not even a real problem).

    And yes, I know what Im talking about.
    I've been there about a 7-8 times as well as having been twice as a teacher and lived amongst the locale population. Two of my friends stayed there and married Cubans and I also know two couples that came to live from Cuba to Canada with no problems.

    Dont believe the hatred that comes from Miami.

  57. Re:News For Nerds by Jumphard · · Score: 1

    Rather than being informed about the world you'd rather hear about how British researchers have proved the existence of anti-matter using laser beams of high intensity, focused into Honey Nut Cheerios?

    This is a helluva lot better than most of the psuedo-science crap that gets posted on /. far too often. Some weeks this place reads more like the The Enquirer Nerds.

  58. who is Richard Stallman going to copy now? by peter303 · · Score: 0, Troll

    See, there is a /. link in this story.

  59. Re:News for Nerds by Four_One_Nine · · Score: 1

    Sorry, even though parent has been modded "-1 Troll" I have to agree. While this does fall into the category of "Stuff that Matters" it is hardly "News for Nerds." There is probably not a single person here for whom Slashdot is their only source of news. This being said, I come to /. to read stories that I *don't* get on Drudge or my local news site.

    When I fired up Firefox this morning my 3 tabs auto-opened. One of them is /. one of them is Drudge. I glanced at Drudge and then thought actually crossed my mind "I wonder if /. is going to have a story on the Castro thing." I decided nah - that's going to be over-reported everywhere else - they wouldn't bother.

    I was wrong. It's not the first time. However, I think in this case /. was wrong also. The increasing inclusion of 'mainstream' news is definitely diluting the waters here.

    --
    I did it for Johnny.
  60. go back to cuba by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. ask a cuban to go on the internet

    2. ask them to write something critical of castro

    what happens next to said cuban?

    this is a superior place? because they don't have starbucks?

    so you prefer autocracy and censorship and police state over starbucks and mcdonalds?

    dude: your priorities stink

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:go back to cuba by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      what happens next to said cuban?

      Excellent question. Do you have a documented example of something bad happening? Or are you, too, simply scaremongering?

    2. Re:go back to cuba by phayes · · Score: 1

      Show me a documented example of what happens to a cuban who criticizes the state online.
      How about you do the work. Try to find instances where cuban citizens residing in Cuba have tried to set up their own political party & pushed for free elections online without being prosecuted by the state. Please close the door on your way out as we don't expect your return for a while...
      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    3. Re:go back to cuba by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      How about you do the work.

      How about the person making the supposition supporting their claims? I know, what a crazy idea here on Slashdot, the bastion of the baseless assertion...

    4. Re:go back to cuba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you prefer autocracy and censorship and police state over starbucks and mcdonalds? Well, maybe not Starbucks, but McDonald's food sucks. I'll take a totalitarian regime over a Big Mac (or as I like to call that petty excuse for a hamburger, Pig Sac) any day.
  61. Slashdot nerds have a soft spot for dictators by smitth1276 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    So long as the dictators are sufficiently leftist, slashdotters are all about the totalitarian dictators. Half of them want to make out with Hugo Chavez, for example.

  62. Re:News For Nerds by dascritch · · Score: 1

    Castro is the only communist (and not only Communist) dictator to have official sponsorship by Adidas !

    YEAH ! Futbooooooooooooooooooooool !

    And the only "civilised" country that doesn't have soccer as a main cultural event is USA.

    --
    (Sorry my bad French) Je fais parler les Guignols de l'Info. Le pied, quoi.
  63. Lies!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The governments in Central and South America are really quite sick of the US trying to control them all of the time and there is a real backlash taking place.

    That's clearly a lie. Those countries don't have any oil, why would we care about controlling them.

    1. Re:Lies!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the bananas of course.

    2. Re:Lies!! by MrSteveSD · · Score: 1

      Well some of them certainly do have oil, but it's not always about oil. For example, sometimes it's about Bananas as was the case with Guatemala and the United Fruit Company.

  64. This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by smitth1276 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People like that--the faux-intellectuals who engage in slashdot groupthink as a means of addressing their own intellectual insecurities--are the reasons I usually don't even get down into the comments. This one had too much potential to pass up... cognitive dissonance is always a good potential source of humor with these people.

    What to do? Make silly, baseless, incredibly ignorant claims that the US is pretty much the same as Cuba? Praise Castro, and maybe tie the Che Guevara poster hanging in my cubicle into the conversation? Talk about how Hugo Chavez is the best thing since Castro? Or maybe just act like a normal, intelligent, rational human being? Of course, the latter is to be avoided at all costs on slashdot, so that's unlikely.

    1. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who are you? Howard Roark?

    2. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      Wow. I've never seen an AC commenter be accused of representing Slashdot group think. You sure you're not projecting your own insecurities here? Or are you too busy stating false dichotomies to notice that you're replying to an AC?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    3. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by smitth1276 · · Score: 1

      Wow. I've never seen an AC commenter be accused of representing Slashdot group think. You sure you're not projecting your own insecurities here? Or are you too busy stating false dichotomies to notice that you're replying to an AC?

      I think your emphasis on the anonymity of the comment sort of reinforces the point that Slashdot membership--being one of the "community"--is elevated to some ridiculous therapeutic importance... so, no. I disagree with you, and think you actually lent support to my point.

      That point aside, I'm sure you can find no end of similar sentiments expressed in these comments by registered users if you bother yourself. It is a pattern of cliquish behavior, and neither begins nor ends with the one particular comment to which I was responding--or to this story, even. The monolithic thought-clique extends to patents, anti-Microsoft stupidity, belief that Obama is the second coming of Jesus Christ, absolutely unwillingness to understand the "other side" in debates about FISA and other counter-terrorism measures, etc. It is absolutely all-encompassing.

      There is more diversity of thought at a Ku Klux Klan rally than is typically evident in Slashdot comments.

    4. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      I think your emphasis on the anonymity of the comment sort of reinforces the point that Slashdot membership--being one of the "community"--is elevated to some ridiculous therapeutic importance...


      No, you completely missed the point. Being an AC makes it damn near impossible to be part of a community, as there is no history to be tracked, no Karma to be seen and no friending or foeing to be done. To accuse an AC to be part of groupthink is to detect it where the group part of the insult is missing completely.

      To top it off, I dare you to actually do a full analysis of just one story. I doubt you have done anything other than remember all the comments you disagree with it. Come back to me when you have actual numbers to support your statement that there is a monolithic thought-clique. Not to mention that consensus != groupthink. Or do you also like to accuse scientists who subscribe to quantum mechanics of group think? Maybe you also consider biologists who subscribe to evolution as victims of group think?

      Groupthink is a laughable accusation in any situation. To accuse an AC of groupthink just means that the accuser has issues with articulating proper arguments and finding himself with a minority opinion.
      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    5. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by smitth1276 · · Score: 1

      "Not to mention that consensus != groupthink."

      The idea that slashdot discussions are dominated by objective and rational people who arrive at a consensus after careful thought is--literally--laughable. But that's fine... you're free to deny what is obvious if you like. I'm not the first to note that slashdot has devolved into a self-parody at this point.

      There is currently an article on the front page about Microsoft giving away developer tools for free to students. That is, by any objective standard, an awesome program. What is the thoughtful "consensus" of the bastions of intellect that are slashdot readers? According to the tags listed, "thefirsthitisfree, education, it, microsoft, itsatrap". Nothing irrational, biased, groupthinky, or downright unintelligent about that! No, sir! I'm sure the "abouttime", "freestuff", or "ohgoodie" tags will be right behind. I'll be holding my breath while the coucil of wise ones thoughtfully comes to a consensus when they aren't busy calling everyone who disagrees with their naive world view "fascists".

    6. Re:This is slashdot, expect ignorant morons by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      "Not to mention that consensus != groupthink."
      The idea that slashdot discussions are dominated by objective and rational people who arrive at a consensus after careful thought is--literally--laughable.

      Logic lesson:

      consensus != groupthink and slashdot != groupthink are not identical, nor can you arrive at one by starting from the other.
      consensus != groupthink and slashdot == rationalthink (where presumably rationalthink == !groupthink) is similarly impossible to derive from each other.

      You also seem to lack a sense of humor and ignored Microsoft's long-standing habit of handing things out for free to establish monopoly markets.

      All in all, you're thoroughly making an ass of yourself. To summarize your initial post:
      1) People disagree with you.
      2) You proceed to insult people who disagree with you
      3) You insult people by associating terms with them that by definition do not apply to them.

      Your subsequent posts merely make unproven assumptions and unprovable leaps of logic. Not to mention that they display a sense of misunderstood superiority that is almost pitiful.
      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  65. Try the rest of Latin America by sultanoslack · · Score: 1

    Not to downplay Cuba's problems, but for the record, it ranks 7th (out of 32 countries) on the UN's Human Development Index for Latin America and the Caribbean. If communism / capitalism were the deciding factor in the quality of life in Latin America, statistically one would have to conclude that communism is preferable. Reality, however, is a little more complicated than that.

  66. Re:News For Nerds by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

    Brad and Angelina? WTF, dude, didn't you see that the news today is that Lindsay Lohan has posed nude? Sheesh!

  67. Slashdot Anti-American Hating Disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have to love a bunch of whiny slashdotters who bitch and moan about any little US government intrusion on our freedoms and then turn around and tout the virtues of a communist dictator who hand picks his brother as his successor and controls his country with an iron fist for 60 years. (what free elections) Or all the noise about the US using too much military force, and then complaining about using a financial embargo to encourage change. Maybe if the US just did nothing but asked nicely Castro would allow true democratic elections and return the millions/billions of US investment that he stole when he nationalized the country. But at least he lifted his people out of poverty. (not) If you guys love Cuba so much why don't you move there. It should be your liberal paradise. Instead we have thousands of Cubans risking their lives to escape from the island paradise to the US, but you whiny slashdotters know better. If Castro had his way you would all be rounded up and thrown in prison. But please keep telling us how the US is bad and Cuba is the place to be like anyone with a brain is going to believe you.

  68. Re:News For Nerds by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Funny

    I bet candid beach photos of Angelina get a LOT more downloads than candid beach photos of Castro...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  69. there is a good argument to be made by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    for a country, with a large poor population, going radically socialist, at the detriment to some freedoms, in order to force a large part of the population out of poverty. for example venezuela's hugo chavez is using petrodollar-funded socialism to aid venezuela's poor (those petrodollars, ironically, considering chavez's hot air about evil america, are coming from american soccer moms refilling their suvs)

    however, also consider the recent vote a few months back in venezuela. chavez, to his credit, asked the venezuelan people if they would let him alter the constitution to dramatically extend his powers. rather than just take those powers by force, like we hear about time and time again in the world. the venezuelan people rejected his power grab, even in the poor parts of venezuela that enthusiastically support chavez otherwise. and chavez, again to his credit, accepted their decision

    however, in cuba, you have those authoritarian despotic powers that castro weild. does he have that right? no, he certainly does not. and i think if you asked the average cuban, who benefitted the most from the enforced socialist policies that castro enacted, why they couldn't also have more democratic freedoms, i think that cuban would probably have the same opinion of castro as those poor venezuelans do about chavez: yes to castro's policy, no to castro's absolute power

    so socialism for the poor: yes. despotic autocracy: no. in such a way, you can criticize castro without rejecting the policies that benefitted the cuban poor

    and btw, frankly, as an american, hugo chavez can talk about constant phantom cia threats on his life, how the evil imperialistic america is about to invade caracas at any moment, etc., blah blah blah. zzz. be as big a fearmongering demagogue gas bag as he wants, i don't care. as long as he uses petrodollars to aid venezuelan poor, and he doesn't abuse his powers and destroy venezuelan democracy, chavez has my support 100%

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:there is a good argument to be made by STrinity · · Score: 1

      however, also consider the recent vote a few months back in venezuela. chavez, to his credit, asked the venezuelan people if they would let him alter the constitution to dramatically extend his powers.
      I'm just going to Godwinize this discussion now -- Hitler was democratically elected. Getting popular support for something doesn't make it right.
      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    2. Re:there is a good argument to be made by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      for a country, with a large poor population, going radically socialist, at the detriment to some freedoms, in order to force a large part of the population out of poverty. for example venezuela's hugo chavez is using petrodollar-funded socialism to aid venezuela's poor (those petrodollars, ironically, considering chavez's hot air about evil america, are coming from american soccer moms refilling their suvs)


      He mouths off like this because it gets him a lot of support. His kneejerk anti-Americanism plays well, but as his recent backing down over threats to stopping supplying the US with oil show, at the end of the day he knows which side the bread is buttered on. The US is one of the few countries out there that has put investment into refining sour crude, so where else is he going to sell his oil?

      however, also consider the recent vote a few months back in venezuela. chavez, to his credit, asked the venezuelan people if they would let him alter the constitution to dramatically extend his powers. rather than just take those powers by force, like we hear about time and time again in the world. the venezuelan people rejected his power grab, even in the poor parts of venezuela that enthusiastically support chavez otherwise. and chavez, again to his credit, accepted their decision


      I suspect that as much as anything his hold on the military isn't as tight as he likes to let on, and it is, as is so typical in Latin America, the generals who define the limits of a President's powers. They want the ability to yank his chain, which would be seriously compromised if he had gotten his thinly veiled President-for-Life clause.

      The guy is a power-hungry buffoon who, like many other power-hungry buffoons before him, has a temporary source of large amounts of money which he's spending like crazy to buy friends at home and abroad. One would think that being a president of a nation formerly part of the Spanish Empire might read a little history about how Spain managed to go from one of the wealthiest countries on the planet (thanks to all that New World gold) to a broken-down regime being tossed around like a piece of mouldy bread by stronger powers. The oil, like New World gold, won't last forever.
      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:there is a good argument to be made by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      for example venezuela's hugo chavez is using petrodollar-funded socialism to aid venezuela's poor ... the venezuelan people rejected his power grab

      The reason they rejected his power grab is because he screwed up. He has dictated that the farmers must sell food for less than it costs them to produce it. Result—they have stopped growing food. So now, his people go hungry and they spend their petro-dollars on importing food. The American money leaves the country as quickly as it comes in and the people have been reduced to a subsistence existence for as long as the oil continues flowing. People don't like to vote for you when you are the reason they are starving.

      Chavez's solution to this problem is to force the banks to loan the farmers more money so they can sell their food at a loss and sink deeply into debt. I suspect this won't work either. If he wants to feed his people, he will either have to remove the price controls or nationalize the farming industry.

      Chavez has gutted the rest of the economy to such an extent that oil exporting is pretty much the only game in town. He has helped to support his reforms by pillaging wealth from the wealthy, but he is rapidly running out of wealthy people to pillage, so this revenue stream will dry up soon. The multinational corporations, responsible for the bulk of the wealth of the first world, aren't very keen to operate in Venezuela since they were the first victims of his pillaging of wealth.

      At some point in the near future, whenever Chavez threatens to cut off the oil supply to the US, the US will make the much more devastating threat to stop buying it. (Few other countries can refine the low grade of oil Venezuela sells.) Chavez turned the Venezuelan economy into a basket case in a misguided attempt to buy votes. The mess he created is starting to catch up to him and petrodollars will be insufficient to cover the losses. He seems a little bit like Mugabe in this respect; maybe he manufactured this disaster intentionally.

      It remains to be seen whether he will take the power he wanted by force.

  70. Re:News For Nerds by stoolpigeon · · Score: 1

    Unless the embargo law is changed it cannot be ended as long as Fidel or his brother are in charge. And his brother will be in charge.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  71. Re:News For Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm struggling to see how this is news for nerds. [...] [W]hen can we expect to see /. posts about Brad and Angelina?
    Well--cigars, yes; but which nerd exactly would be interested in Brad and Angelina ...? Well, aren't all nerds interested in Angelina?
  72. I saw we temporarily drop the embargo for 2 months by PortHaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Allow for tourism and trade, let the economic ramifications encourage a change of policy.

    (ie: people enjoying $$$ influx, will demand that it continues)

  73. I notice this by mdigiac1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I live north of toronto in a country area. We don't get conventional high speed so I must get it through a satellite. Turns out my provider Routcom does this in a positive way. I pay for 512kbps and they throttle it up to 728kbps for the first 10 seconds to make web browsing faster. I pay near 100 a month for my internet service so I figure it is the least they can do. I realize this is high but it is all that is offered in my area. However ISP that throttles down is not rare. it is just another form of not providing reliable internet speeds.

    --
    Windows on a mac is Windows under Supervision. - Frank Soltis(Chief Scientist/Designer of AS400)
  74. U.S. Private Ownership? by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think the U.S. could do it if they tried. The old money in the U.S. has too much political clout and personal interest in carving up Cuba for themselves. Cubans would be worse off than the Florida ghettos if the U.S. touched them.

    "According to geographer and Cuban Comandante Antonio Núñez Jiménez, 75% of Cuba's best arable land was owned by foreign individuals or foreign (mostly U.S.) companies. One of the first policies by the newly formed Cuban government was eliminating illiteracy and implementing land reforms. Land reform efforts helped to raise living standards by subdividing larger holdings into cooperatives. Comandante Sori Marin, nominally in charge of land reform, objected and fled and eventually was executed. Many other anti-Batista, but not Marxist, rebel leaders were forced in to exile, purged in executions, or in failed uprisings such as those of the Beaton brothers."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Revolution

    Cuba needs communism. They should probably follow China's lead and open up the borders culturally and keep a tight stranglehold on passports, but the land is the property of the people, managed by the government.

    Poor Cuba. I hope they get a good leader. Else they're screwed.

    1. Re:U.S. Private Ownership? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cubans would be worse off than the Florida ghettos if the U.S. touched them.

      They already are.

      Cuba needs communism.

      They already have it.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    2. Re:U.S. Private Ownership? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      China doesn't even function like that any more. In fact, it only really functioned like that from the Nationalist Defeat until Mao's decline. The real Chinese leadership for the last three decades isn't really Communist at all. It's a technocracy with strong socialist elements (though these are in decline). China is rapidly becoming precisely the state that Deng Xiaoping envisioned, a centrally-controlled economic power, delivering the idealized Chinese civilization of hierarchical stability.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:U.S. Private Ownership? by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah and the sky is blue.

      I didn't say or even imply that Cuba wasn't communist. I said that Cuba *needs* communism.

      When Communism was lifted from East Berlin, Western interests immediately began laying claim to their old properties. The difference here is the amount of foreign interest. As long as the Cuban land owned by Americans is not returned to the children of those Americans, there will continue to be trade embargoes. In order for the U.S. to lift trade embargoes, most of the property in Cuba may be forced into the hands of Americans. This is *not* going to help the Cubans at all.

      To put it more simply. If *your* family had a resort expropriated in Havana, would you be happy to see Disney purchase it from the Cuban government?

      Regarding Florida, I guess it depends on perspective. Cuba doesn't have ghettos, and every Cuban has healthcare. Some might call all of Cuba a ghetto, but I don't think that's an accurate portrayal of the country.

    4. Re:U.S. Private Ownership? by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      Cubans need Communism? Nothing like people accidentally being racists to give me a good laugh. Do the blacks still need plantations too?

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    5. Re:U.S. Private Ownership? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      So instead of Cubans being able to own property, and some Americans also owning property in Cuba, it's better for Castro to own all the property and for the Cubans to be imprisoned serfs?

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  75. "Flamebait" huh? by smitth1276 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I guess the truth hurts sometimes. The point is bare even arguable, but go ahead and label it flamebait.

    1. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      The point is "bare even arguable"?

      A: What does that mean?

      B: Assuming you mean that the point is arguable,
              your comment is as much flamebait as it would
              be for me to say "as long as the dictators
              are sufficiently rightist, slashdotters are all
              about totalitarian dictators. Half of them
              want to make out with Benito Mussolini,
              for example".

      Such a wide brush you paint with! I am "leftist",
      but I don't want to make out with Hugo Chavez,
      I don't support Castro, and his methods of keeping
      himself in power, or what he has done with Cuba.
      I think socialism in Britain went too far until
      Thatcher, and I think socialism in France has
      gone too far.

      Your post was flamebait, take your lumps.
      You want to be critical of policies of political
      groups on the left, have at, lots of very fair
      game. But make an actual point, rather than
      "damn them leftist idiots!".

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    2. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by smitth1276 · · Score: 1

      your comment is as much flamebait as it would be for me to say "as long as the dictators are sufficiently rightist, slashdotters are all about totalitarian dictators. Half of them want to make out with Benito Mussolini".

      That would be stupid and make no sense, where as one need only search slashdot for "Hugo Chavez" to confirm that slashdotters, in general, are pretty big fans of hard leftist totalitarians. The love them some Che Guevara. They love them some Hugo Chavez. They love Castro, and will sing whatever praises of Castro that Michael Moore tells them too.

      Of course, I'm speaking in generalities, and there are certainly exceptions. For example, you are clearly an exception. I am also clearly an exception... I don't love Hugo Chavez--I think he is a very stupid man--like a high school jock who bullied is way "up" until he found himself in way over his head--who appeals to the lowest common denominator intellectually. I think people who praise him are among the stupidest people on the planet (and I absolutely think that they are inferior to me in virtually every way... in case the tone didn't make that clear). Is that arrogant of me? No. It's what I think, and I'm pretty sure it is measurably true.

      And that is my main point... slashdot is full of people who really aren't that bright. They are the target "lowest common denominator" demographic of most of the rhetoric coming from people like Castro, Chavez, et al, as well as their cheerleaders like Michael Moore. It is a lot of very insecure people who engage in the slashdot groupthink because they have a need to "fit in". They mouth platitudes and praises of brutal tyrants because all the cool kids are doing it, and the cool kids--who tend to also be intellectual lightweights--are also reflexively leftist. Pointing out the circle-jerky nature of slashdot is not "flamebait", no matter how much you wish it were.

    3. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 1

      To answer your question: I'm a communist, and I'm definitely smarter than you. How do I know this? Well, I read the papers and understand the English language and this has led me to realize that a guy like Hugo Chavez, who has won umpteen elections and referendums, and who gracefully admitted defeat when he didn't win the last referendum, cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called a totalitarian.

      Chavez is a New Dealer and a throwback to the nationalizing governments that Western countries used to have (and some still do). Calling him a totalitarian is just silly, whether or not you like his policies.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    4. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communism and all its fetid variations have killed more people than the religions you so despise. Tens and tens of millions. Hitler was a cake walk compared to the misery and death communism has visited upon the world.

      Hugo wants to be a dictator but the military has been holding him back.

    5. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      "That would be stupid and make no sense"

      That is my point, exactly.

      We must be reading different slashdots, I have been reading for a while, and
      I am not seeing much praise at all for any of the people you name, nor any
      other totalitarian leaders ( note, I did not say none ). The "general" case
      in my experience has been other than you indicate.

      If you believe that slashdot posters are insecure group-followers who post
      the party line, why are you reading the comments? I know of a couple sites
      I read where the posts are pretty much all predictable cheerleading for a
      viewpoint, I don't read those comments much.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    6. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 1

      Wants to be a dictator, eh? Well he's going a funny way about it with them elections and referendums and all.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    7. Re:"Flamebait" huh? by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      Of course, I'm speaking in generalities,

      And that's why your flamebait-modded comments are modded that way.

      And that is my main point... slashdot is full of people who really aren't that bright. They are the target "lowest common denominator" demographic of most of the rhetoric coming from people like Castro, Chavez, et al, as well as their cheerleaders like Michael Moore.

      And there's another reason. Not only are they generalities, inaccurate ones no less, but they are insulting ones as well.

  76. Re:News For Nerds by acvh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    some of us like Cuban cigars.

    some of us want to visit Cuba, like everyone else in the world can.

    some of us would love an opportunity to live in a Caribbean island nation while working to bring their network infrastructure up to international standards.

  77. both are failed policies by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    but the diplomatic policy's failure is a minor addendum. it didn't effect the verdict on how and why communism failed

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  78. those countries could benefit from some socialism by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    but hugo chavez's brand of socialism, not castro's brand that assumes police state control

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  79. What if Cubans refuse American dollars? by JulianConrad · · Score: 1

    Given how the dollar has tanked lately, smart Cubans would prefer Loonies and Euros instead.

  80. Re:News for Nerds by Brikus · · Score: 1

    People may go to other news sites, but Slashdot's user base is unique and its the discussion of issues like these that has me reading them. I mean, who reads the article anyway?

  81. Considering the Political Leanings Here by N8F8 · · Score: 1

    I bet the is a bummer for most of you.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  82. I hope he doesn't shave his beard by LM741N · · Score: 1

    Where would all the fleas go?

  83. So why cuba and not china by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Can someone explain why we embargo cuba while we can't trade fast enough with China? All I can think of is:

    "They're communists!"
    So is china.

    "Well they had soviet bases and nukes pointed at us once"
    China's got nukes now.

    "They rob their people of land and rights"
    So does china.

    "They don't allow Christianity"
    Neither does china.

    Maybe I'm not supposed to understand and I should just shut up and stop thinking... WTF still cares about Cuba anyway?

    1. Re:So why cuba and not china by aflag · · Score: 0

      What you miss is that china has a lot to offer, cuba not so much.

    2. Re:So why cuba and not china by Nulukkhizdin · · Score: 1

      "They don't allow Christianity" Then how did John Paul II get there?

    3. Re:So why cuba and not china by PPH · · Score: 1
      The Castro government expropriated property owned by US individuals and corporations. Various pieces of legislation, including the Helms-Burton Act have sought to enforce this embargo and extend it to cover third party nations who do business with Cuba, profiting from seized property.

      As usual, if you want to know what motivates our government, forget about democracy and human rights and follow the money.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  84. Re:News for Nerds by Derek+Loev · · Score: 1

    On the contrary, when I heard Fidel Castro had resigned this was the first place I checked. I wasn't too familiar with what this meant for Cuba/the rest of the world and am actually pretty happy it was posted on /. because it gave me a chance to read through some more people's opinion.

  85. Be a little objective will ya? by GauteL · · Score: 1

    When comparing Cuba's economy, please don't compare it with only the "shining beacons of capitalism". Compare it to it's neighbours and other countries with similar demographics and natural resources.

    Why? There may be loads of reasons why Cuba does worse economically than USA, Europe and Japan that has nothing to do with Fidel Castro or communism.

    I've seen crumbled buildings, antiquated cars, tourist warnings and flogging of prostitutes in many, many countries that could not be described as communist or socialist, so why is it suddenly the fault of Castro when Cuba looks like this?

    It may very well be that Cuba does worse than most comparable nations, and they did receive loads of support from the Soviet Union for a while, but I don't find it particularly convincing an argument to compare their living standards to those in the west.

  86. So... by billyt007 · · Score: 1

    So does this mean Kyle can go to the Raging Pussies' concert?

    --
    Open Source, Open Standards, Open Minds
  87. you have cause and effect backwards by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    your way of thinking about the situation is the same as making the police guilty for the kidnapper shooting the hostage. maybe the police tried a bungled rescue operation. but even if the police did something really stupid, who is ultimately responsible for the hostage's death? the kidnapper is ultimately guilty for shooting the hostage, no matter what the police do. to think about the situation any other way is to not understand accountability and reason

    castro assumed dicatorial police state powers. this is not the doing of the usa, this is the doing of castro. how does your mind work where the efforts of the usa's enemies, that the usa opposes, are the fault of the usa? that's quite the creative line of reasoning there

    for example, the usa's current attitude towards iran pays political dividends to iran's hardliners, and weakens iran's reformists. this is 100% solid absolute fact. however, whatever iran's hoardliner's do: crack down on personal freedoms, accelerate nuclear weapon development, etc., this is still the utlimate fault of iran's hardliners, not the usa. to lay blame in any other way is to have a really perverse way of thinking about the usa's proper role in the world

    the usa's proper role in the world is to be just another country. but your way of thinking posits the usa as the center of all responsibility and accountability in the world. i don't think that, you do. in such a world, what do you ultimately get? you get the usa militarily invading other countries. i don't want that. your wya of thinking DOES want that

    here: the usa is responsible for everything, right? that's your position. do you understand the implications of your position? the implications of YOUR way of thinking about the usa says the usa bears the burden to fix the entire world. of course the usa is not responsible for the entire world. but that's exactly what you think, by throwing accountability and responsibility for everything, even what the usa's enemies do, at the foot of the usa

    and then the usa HAS to fix things that really are everyone's responsibilty, or domestic situations. according to your thinking. for example, a typical gem of your way of thinking blames the existence of iraq under saddam hussein on the usa. why? because hussein shook hands with dick cheney once? hussein had dealings with russia, france, china, etc. in as many deep ways, with the shadowy sides of those governments just as shadowy as all the cia operations in iraq you can elicit

    and yet some people who think like you lay at the foot of the usa every bad thing saddam did. why not china? why not russia? why not france? incredible. but even more incredible is that someone who then blames the usa for everything, even for what an avowed enemy of the usa does... they would then oppose the usa's invasion of iraq. hey: didn't you just blame saddam hussein on the usa? hussein is the usa's mess? it is of course absurd to think hussein is the fault of the usa, but now that the usa is cleaning up a mess, people who think like you say is the usa's fault... what did you expect?

    accountability and responsibility, do you understand how it works in the real world? your way of thinking about the usa's role in the world INVITES THE USA MILITARILY INTO EVERY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET. your way of thinking does that. yes. look at your comment above: you implicitly lay the blame for the rise of castro at the feet of the usa. that is exactly what you say in your comment above. is castro a despot of a police state? yes. so if the usa invaded cuba, ACCORDING TO YOUR WAY OF THINKING IT WOULD JUSTIFIABLE. it is of course NOT justifiable for the usa to invade cuba. but your way of thinking says it is. you blame castro on the usa. its insane

    it's a really common and frankly, ethnocentric and sheltered and ignorant way to view the world as the provenance of the usa. and a lot of americans and europeans think this way. mainly because they are propagandized, and haven't given the issue any real thought, they just tow a braindead partisa

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  88. Big Deal by kpainter · · Score: 1

    So, his brother is going to take over. Tell me, how is this any different at all?

  89. Some facts about Cuba Healthcare by DVega · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Cuba health indicators

    According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the chance of a Cuban child dying at five years of age or younger is 7 per 1000 live births in Cuba, while it's 8 per 1000 in the US. WHO reports that Cuban males have a life expectancy at birth of 75 years and females 79 years. In comparison, the US life expectancy at birth is 75 and 80 years for males and females, respectively. Cuba's infant mortality rate is better than the US with 5 deaths per thousand in Cuba versus 7 per thousand in the US. Cuba has nearly twice as many physicians as the U.S. -- 5.91 doctors per thousand people compared to 2.56 doctors per thousand, according to WHO.
    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
    1. Re:Some facts about Cuba Healthcare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot something:
      "Abortion rates, which are high in Cuba, increased dramatically during the 1980s, but had almost halved by 1999 and declined to near 1970s levels of 32.0 per 100 pregnancies. The rate is still among the highest in Latin America and also one explanation for the low infant mortality rate.[12]"

    2. Re:Some facts about Cuba Healthcare by Stephen+Ma · · Score: 1

      How about explaining away the other WHO stats? Notably, that a Cuban child is less likely to die by age of five than is a child in the supposedly far wealthier U. S. of A. ?

  90. Re:News For Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Darmoc and Gilead at Tinagra.
    The beast at Tinagra.

    Shaka... when the towers fell.

  91. Re:You don't say! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, the article is redundant, not the comment, you fuckwits.

  92. I wish I could mod this +10 by brunes69 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The US is pretty much the only country that has a gripe with Cuba, and that is just because they are the only country who have ever had the guts to kick the US out.

    1. Re:I wish I could mod this +10 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      They did kick the US out... and every other property owner, too. To wonder why other countries didn't have that much of an investment in Cuba one only needs to look at a map.

      That Cuba has had a change of heart and now WANTS foreign investment is another matter entirely. I love how the people of Cuba aren't allowed to stay at the tourist hotels that they work in. Nice place.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:I wish I could mod this +10 by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      They did kick the US out... and every other property owner, too. To wonder why other countries didn't have that much of an investment in Cuba one only needs to look at a map.
      ..and that's basically what the hatred towards Cuba boils down to and why the US limits its citizens from visiting this evil communist state.
    3. Re:I wish I could mod this +10 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      While the government of Cuba is indeed "evil", though I hate that word, that is not the only reason. You have to consider that Cuba was once part of the US - and so a fight between the two is more personal than a fight between strangers. A divorce is always more bitter than a bar fight.

      But beyond emotion, the original reason for the sanctions was the theft of property - and not enough Cuban assets in the US to seize to make up for it. Contrast this with Venezuela, who has done a similar thing to Exxon very recently - but Venezuela has considerable assets outside of Venezuela which Exxon can have seized as retribution.

      The next thing that happened is that the people that Castro forced to leave Cuba (mostly the rich) became quite powerful in American politics. This has prolonged the sanctions far longer than they otherwise would have been. I mean, we fought a WAR with Vietnam many years AFTER Castro took power, and Vietnam is now a trading partner while Cuba is not.

      Of course, it helped that Vietnam made conciliatory gestures - Castro is not that sort of man. Hopefully his brother is. Cuba needs tourism, even if you don't think that they need foreign investment.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  93. My God, JFK was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There is no doubt in my mind when history was written, the final page will say: Victory was achieved by the United States of America for the good of the world."

  94. Re:News For Nerds by blindd0t · · Score: 1

    The parent post has it right. The difference between news regarding US relations with Cuba and news about Brad and Angelina is the second part of the tag-line (which was conveniently omitted from GP's post): "Stuff that matters."

  95. Keep In Mind by N8F8 · · Score: 1

    When you propose a lovey-dovey relationship with the Cuban government that there are people who are still alive who had everything taken from them and loved-ones killed in the violent overthrow.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Keep In Mind by rholland356 · · Score: 1

      When you propose a lovey-dovey relationship with the Cuban government that there are people who are still alive who had everything taken from them and loved-ones killed in the violent overthrow.

      Yes, this is true. Just as there are survivors of injustice after every conflict.
      Time to move on.
  96. Re:News For Nerds by grub · · Score: 1


    Unless the embargo law is changed it cannot be ended as long as Fidel or his brother are in charge. And his brother will be in charge.

    My brother-in-law works as a geek for a Canadian company in Cuba. 3 weeks on, 3 weeks off. They fly him back and forth. Says it's quite a nice place overall.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  97. My advice to Senior R. Castro by mapkinase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do not be Gorbachev, be Den Xiao Ping.

    Do not start with political freedoms, start with economic ones...

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  98. Super-free haven? by Nexus7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, I don't think the left argues that Cuba is some kind of paragon of liberty. They argue that the policy towards Cuba should be something like that towards China, one of engagement that will encourage them to move towards free market reforms, which will lead to individual freedoms.

    Stating that "the left" has some rosy idea about Cuba makes people say, well, nobody has the right answer, both sides are equally bad. That isn't the case.

    1. Re:Super-free haven? by cromar · · Score: 1

      It's accurate to say the far left has some kinda rose-tinted idea of Cuba and Communism in general. Reasonable people on the Left and Right are far different from the extremists on the far Left and far Right. I'm really getting tired of the growing number of extremists the world over :(

    2. Re:Super-free haven? by Solandri · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, I don't think the left argues that Cuba is some kind of paragon of liberty. They argue that the policy towards Cuba should be something like that towards China, one of engagement that will encourage them to move towards free market reforms, which will lead to individual freedoms.
      Prior to the 1970s, U.S. policy to fight Communism was one of isolationism. After Nixon more or less normalized relations with China, the policy has been to encourage free market reforms within them.

      Cuba missed the boat because there's a politically active ex-Cuban population in Florida which mostly opposes rescinding the embargo. Florida is the 4th most populous state, which due to the Electoral College system has about 10% of the winner-takes-all votes needed to win the Presidency. The ex-Cuban population is influential enough over that vote that neither political party wants to cross them. And so the embargo stays. If the Cuban exiles had settled in, say, Louisiana instead of Florida, the embargo probably would've been dropped in the '70s or '80s

      One of their sticking points has been no normalization of relations with Cuba while Castro is in power. So it'll be interesting to see how his resignation plays out with the politics there. Regardless, most of the hardcore anti-Communist faction (those involved with the Bay of Pigs and directly fighting Castro) is in or approaching their 70s now, and will start dying of old age soon. So I would expect a major shift in policy towards Cuba within the next 10-20 years regardless of what happens in Cuba. Changing a person's attitude about something is a lot easier if they were only taught it by their parents, as opposed to having friends and brothers killed in the line of battle over it.

    3. Re:Super-free haven? by imipak · · Score: 1

      If the US meant what it said about the importance of opposing communist tyranny, fanning the flames of freedom and all that, it wouldn't be repatriating Vietnamese refugees back to communist Vietnam.

    4. Re:Super-free haven? by Capitalist1 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're making the mistake of buying into the idea that America's "left" wants Cuba to become more free. In reality, America's "left" wants the US to become more like Cuba.

      --
      One man's religion is another man's belly-laugh. - LL
  99. The Cubans who fled after the revolution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Cubans who fled after the revolution were by and large supporters of the corrupt Batista Government, wealthy

    I say this is largely a bunch of revisionist crap. The Castro government would say that is the only reason to leave that workers paradise.

    Most Cubans, like most Americans, were oblivious to politics, and just trying to earn a living.

    The fall of Batisa only occured when large number of the middle and upper classes joined the revolution.

    Many of these revolutary patriots believed Castro would actually hold elections after the revolution. Instead they got uncompensated property expropriation, internal purges, and the announcement that there would be no need for elections, as "the people" had spoken. They also got a military infiltration into their personal affairs that Bastista was never able to do.

    Most of these wealthy Cubans were not able to convert their assets and put them on a boat and leave.

    Much like the Jews who were smart enough to leave early, Cubans who wanted an exit visa, merely had to turn over all their assets at the border.

    They came to this country with nothing. They gave up their lavish lifestyles and returned to the lowers rung of American Laborer.

    If they are sipping Mohitos in their condo, it is only because THEY EARNED IT. OR REEARNED IT ALL OVER AGAIN. And most did it through hard labor that most leftist campus intellectals would never stoop to doing.

  100. Amazing Great News by toddhisattva · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I see a lot of Castro apologetics here. More faith on display than at an evangelical tent revival. Adulation that few Roman Emperors received.

    Most telling, are all the stretched-past-breaking comparisons of Castro's regime to America's Democratic Republic.

    Methinks they dost project too much.

    Because we have here, in the person of Fidel Castro, the perfect exemplar of Socialism.

    And his state really did have death camps. It really had no press. It had the midnight door-knocks that meant torture, real fucking torture, and even worse - whole families tortured to death.

    Look at Castro's fanboys here on Slashdot. Not a one of them has an honest brain, else they'd realize under Socialism they would be killed for exercising Freedom of Speech. How brave, how insightful and informative they are so safely bitching about America.

    They complain that President Bush liberated Iraq so his cronies could make money.

    Under Socialism, nobody has anything - except the rulers. No American President has ever even been able to enact such strict cronyism. Not even LBJ, and certainly not President George W. Bush.

    Accusation after accusation they have hurled at President George W. Bush. Each and every single accusation is something they themselves support in the person and policies of Castro.

    Only by such massive projection are they able to excuse their own hypocrisy.

    Only by such massive projection are they able to excuse the torture, the death camps, the deindustrialization, the poverty, the complete stifling of any and all Human Rights, that their brainless devotion to their religion has brought the world.

    Only by such massive projection can they ignore the historical facts.

    The rest of us know that today is the brightest day the lovely island of Cuba has seen in five decades!

    1. Re:Amazing Great News by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Perhaps some day you should pick up a dictionary and look up the word "socialism". What you're talking about is Communism or Marxist-Leninism, which are types of socialism. The US, like very industrialized country on the planet is a hybrid socialist-free enterprise state.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  101. Yay for a free Guantanamo! by gwolf · · Score: 1

    Oh, you mean you were talking about the rest of the island?
    Ok... Well, no comments.

    1. Re:Yay for a free Guantanamo! by phayes · · Score: 1
      Have you lost your job/Been imprisioned/had to go live in another country because you asked for free elections in your own country? Nope.

      Do you post redundant comments to slashdot? Yep.

      I won't presume to say that Mexico's freedoms are 100% as they should be, but they are worlds better than Cuba's.

      Having visited your beautiful country many times with my Mexican friends living here in Paris, I usually get ribbed as the Yanqui, but after all we are all Estados Unidos & have much more in common than with the Cubans. I wish it wasn't so, but in Cuba, Free doesn't yet mean what it should.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  102. Re:subtitle by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    Well there's always the Che poster hanging at an Obama office. Story

  103. Re:News for Nerds by ak3ldama · · Score: 1

    People may go to other news sites, but Slashdot's user base is unique and its the discussion of issues like these that has me reading them...

    I am reading this discussion, only to see the discussion of how or why this would be on Slashdot. We have seen in the past (or recent history) that Taco has said that he has had to make concessions on some issues to please the powers that be. Other things he won't compromise on. So if this (posting mainstream news and breaking the basic vision of slashdot) is how he compromises then this is not the end of the world. That said, I do wish this wasn't on slashdot.

    --
    "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
  104. Have you been to anywhere in Latin America? by gwolf · · Score: 1

    Maybe not anywhere, of course... But have you visited Mexico's border cities? Guatemalan medium- or small-sized cities? Bolivia? Peru?
    I've been to the places I tell you. And I know I have not seen the worst places.
    What you describe can be seen in countries that suffered from poverty and isolationism also due to mostly right-winged, army- and US- backed governments. It's not related to communism at all - it is related to relegating the population, it is related to having a too strong governing class.

  105. Because Florida is a Swing State by bobobobo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The original embargo was based on the privatization of primarily American business interests. The Cuban Government effectively stole billions from American investors. Obviously the affiliation with the Soviets did not help. So since the Soviet Union has dissolved, why does it prevail? The simple reason, that there are many anti-Castro ex-Cubans residing in Florida, and Florida as we all know is a swing state. It would be political suicide for anyone in power to suggest removing the embargo and pissing of a(significant enough) chunk of the Sunshine State. The idea being, to leave well enough alone. And then there is obviously political rhetoric involved, not wanting to appear soft on Communism/Socialism. There just isn't enough incentive there for the right or left, to stir the pot.

  106. Re:I saw we temporarily drop the embargo for 2 mon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea.. see how well free trade with China has worked to bring it's people freedom and democracy.

  107. Re:News for Nerds by calebt3 · · Score: 1

    There is probably not a single person here for whom Slashdot is their only source of news Yes there is.
  108. SEE: PEMEX by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1


    So, why not embargo Mexico? Their entire oil industry was started on nationalized American assets.

  109. Bye... by Cheeko · · Score: 1

    Can I have your stuff?

  110. Re:News For Nerds by iBod · · Score: 1

    I hear Castro was a big fan of Lego

  111. The embargo will not go down by Upaut · · Score: 1

    While the corn lobby is as powerful as it is now. The embargo goes down, and the first thing that will start coming out of Cuba, after the cigars, is sugar. Cuba mainly works on cigars because of the embargo, they get more money per gram of cigar then they ever could with sugar. But without the embargo, the much more profit-per-acre is sugar. Which would allow sugar, tariffs included, to go down in price. Which will make it harder for the government to force high-fructose corn syrup down our throats. (Or at least Canadian and Mexican soda will be a little cheaper for us to import...)

    So I guess it really is "news of nerds", as what else is more relevant then out beloved caffeinated beverages and sweet snacks?

    And while I agree that Cuba is probably much different then the tourist section I love, to bring back the sugar economy would solve a lot of the economic issues... It, and an increase in tourism from the blockade going down, would possibly allow the comforts of the tourist region to grow, and eventually envelop the entire country with general comfort and success... Or a massive crystal meth addiction like those below the poverty line in Hawaii... Either or really.

    --
    3 degrees of separation from Vladimir Putin
  112. I was talking about Perez, not Chavez. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    Venezuela's nationalization habits have been going on since the Nixon administration.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Andr%C3%A9s_P%C3%A9rez

    1. Re:I was talking about Perez, not Chavez. by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my family owned a few wells down there at the time. My step-grandfather drilled them in the 40s, IIRC. When my grandmother died in 1974 she thought she was leaving us well off. They threw off $80,000 a year income at the time. That is about $370,000 in 2007 constant dollars. Oil was $12 a barrel at the time ($55.50 in 2007 constant dollars). My dad didn't have the heart to tell her they had just been been nationalized. Easy come easy go. I just wish the Venezuelan government had a better track record of managing the income to the benefit of the populace.

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
  113. Re:News For Nerds by dwye · · Score: 1

    > when can we expect to see /. posts about Brad and Angelina?

    Don't be obstuse.

    Obviously, when Fight Club II and/or Laura Croft III are announced.

  114. would amnesty international help? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1
    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:would amnesty international help? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Umm... okay, here's who got arrested: "Those detained include journalists, owners of private libraries and pro-democracy members of illegal opposition parties, including promoters of the Proyecto Varela"

      Did any of those people "go on the internet ... write something critical of castro" and then get arrested? Nope. Hell, we're not even talking about average, run-of-the-mill Cubans, here. Journalists? Members of illegal opposition parties? And they got arrested... I'm shocked.

      That's not to say this is a good thing. Absolutely not. *However*, that event, which happened 5 years ago, is hardly evidence for the kind of Big Brother-style crackdowns you claim occur there.

      So, give me an example of one single Cuban who simply posted a comment online and got arrested, and I will conceed the point.

      And no, this isn't moving the goalposts. That's all I asked for in the first place. You responded with a terrible event that's basically unrelated. It would be akin to me claiming the US is a dictatorship that arrests all citizens critical of the government, and then citing Guantanamo when challenged on the issue. Is it a bad thing? Yes. But it doesn't address the question at hand.

  115. Re:News For Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there nothing that Honey Nut Cheerios CAN'T do?!?

  116. Re:News for Nerds by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

    I listen to NPR while I'm in my car, and occasionally visit www.cnn.com, but other than that, Slashdot is my main source of news.

  117. You should look out for your confirmation biases by smitth1276 · · Score: 1
    It should have raised red flags for you that the article you linked to didn't actually quote anyone. Here is about the same incident, with a bit more substance (and nuance):

    According to this official - who wished to remain anonymous - in a report handed over to the Committee, Washington acknowledged that the abusive treatment inflicted on prisoners at the hands of American forces could be considered torture in the sense of the International Convention against Torture. ... "They said that it was a matter of isolated cases, that there was nothing systematic and that the guilty parties were now in the process of being punished."
    Etc... basically, the government has acknowledged that you could consider certain things to technically be "torture" if you carefully choose the definitions and if you were hellbent of finding torture where none exists. Based on polling in the past, I think most reasonable people with no political axe to grind are largely ambivalent about the 3 times the US has used waterboarding and whether it should be labeled "torture" (I personally think its absurd to consider waterboarding torture in light of actual torture techniques which are regularly used by others), and that seems to be the one technique which the left has irrationally latched onto in their attempts to convince the world that the US employs "torture" regularly and systematically.

    Of course, if you are reasonably intelligent and thoughtful, you have undoubtedly noticed that even the article that *I* linked above merely cites some anonymous UN official. Here's a hint... if something sounds too absurd to be true, it probably is. If you keep that in mind, you will generally be perceived as a more credible voice. Try to think for yourself, and try to avoid letting biased sources tell you what to think. If you are forming your opinions based on uncorroborated anonymous sources from hostile organizations, you may want to take a few moments to reflect on how you got to that point.
  118. Don't smoke anymore... by filthpickle · · Score: 1

    wasn't really an aficionado when I did, but I could never tell the difference between a good Venezuelan and a Cuban.

    I was told by the old guy at the Cigar shop (who was trying to sell me something) that a lot of growers moved there when Cuba took their land away.

  119. It's about Oil, again ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are large deposits of crude off the Cuban coastline that are not being developed by U.S. corporations because of the embargo. Now of course are congress critters, especially the Republicans, want some type of relaxing of the embargo just for oil field development.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14095881/

    All of a sudden Cuba is "not that bad" since now they appear to have a significant amount of oil reserves. To be honest Fidel Castro is a choir boy compared to some of the oppressive regimes we openly support namely Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, China, and Uzbekistan to name a few.

  120. Re:News For Nerds by powerlinekid · · Score: 3, Funny

    *whipmer*

    That costs extra...

    --

    can't sleep slashdot will eat me
  121. Re:those countries could benefit from some sociali by phayes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You mean the kind where the government is awash in petrodollers yet pisses most of it all away on foreign political projects without maintaining the means of production & where it crashes down around their ears? Call us back in a few years & we'll judge how successful really Chavez was...

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  122. Re:News For Nerds by compro01 · · Score: 1

    Unless the embargo law is changed it cannot be ended as long as Fidel or his brother are in charge. And his brother will be in charge. and his brother is, what, 74? how much longer do you expect him to last? then again, do either of them have any children?
    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  123. Multi-party democracy by greenguy · · Score: 1

    And if it works out there in Cuba, maybe we could try it here in the USA, as well.

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  124. Cuba and UFC by oldhack · · Score: 1

    I'm not arguing for the embargo, but I just think it is wise not to paint Cuba as some super free haven that has the best health-care and education in the world. It is not as bad as the neo-cons paint it nor is it as good as the far left paints it. Hopefully Castro's resignation will spark a multi-party democracy.
    Btw, did the United Fruit Company try to turn Cuba into another banana republic?
    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  125. And this is nerd news how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe a new source of offshore domains?

  126. Re:News For Nerds by corbettw · · Score: 1

    Hans, shouldn't you be focused on your trial, and not looking for your next wife?

    --
    God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  127. Re:News for Nerds by Four_One_Nine · · Score: 1

    So you're claiming there are people here who never listen to the radio when there is a news broadcast, never watch any television station when there is a news broadcast, and never visit any website other than slashdot that contains news?

    --
    I did it for Johnny.
  128. no US citizens != no political prisoners by Steve+Hamlin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Presented: a contra-view to your assertion that because no US citizens are being held at Guantanamo, there are no political prisoners there.

    Can you please provide a reference for "As political prisoners are invariably citizens of the detaining state" ?

    Because I can't find anything, in dictionaries or Wikipedia. Political prisoners are those who (someone claims) are imprisoned for their political views. The term was used a lot to refer to Soviet dissidents (meeting your definition). However, it is often currently used to refer to those who are imprisoned for violence against a government that they were fighting against. In that case, they are usually NOT citizens of the detaining state. Their view that is that they were legitimately resisting a foreign government, and are thus are prisoners of politics, not of crime.

    Another description of Political prisoner from Wikipedia: "A political prisoner can also be someone that has been denied bail unfairly, denied parole when it would reasonably have been given to a prisoner charged with a comparable crime, or special powers may be invoked by the judiciary. Particularly in this latter situation, whether an individual is regarded as a political prisoner may depend upon subjective political perspective or interpretation of the evidence."

    I would think that for a significant number of observers, the people in Guantanamo meet this definition. Disregarding the ultimate factual actions of the detainees, a lot of people believe that the people in Guantanamo are being held without due process of law, outside of an independent review by a court of competent jurisdiction. Based on decisions made by a government for seemingly political ends, as opposed to judicial or criminal needs.

    Not that they didn't commit some real crime. But they are currently prisoners 7 years later because of politics, not because they've been convicted of anything. How many enemy combatants have been tried by a reasonably independent tribunal 7 years after being detained? (CSRTs don't count) Convicted?

    How long can a state keep a non-citizen locked up without a conviction, or even a trial, before they are considered political prisoners?

    I should reply with the exact counter-argument, but then I'd be back in law school arguing both sides.

    1. Re:no US citizens != no political prisoners by phayes · · Score: 1
      Ah, someone who can reason. It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance...

      The millions of german POWs that were help by Stalin for up to 10 years qualify by that definition. It's also kind of touchy for separatists as you mentioned & often expanded much wider which dilutes the term into meaninglesness. Were all catholic NI prisoners in British jails political prisoners? Are the Basques in Spanish/French jails for committing bank robbery political prisoners? The Black Panthers? Do Tax evaders qualify? According to some, Wesley Snipes have been a political prisoner had he been convicted & sentenced to hard time.

      Having chosen to war upon the USA outside all conventions of war, I'll call them illegal combatants as I still find that term to be more apt than political prisoner which implies that they are innocent of acts which would merit the incarceration they are undergoing.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  129. The Trouble is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that there are far more gratuitous comments here (and many other articles) about Bush, Republicans, etc. that make no point but are marked insightful.

    (Score: 5 Insightful)
    "Bush is a wanna be dictator, wants to read your email, and wants to starve children!"

    (Score: -1 Flamebait)
    Hugo Chavez has implemented price controls that have caused food shortages and driven inflation and the black market to new heights"

    Slashdot is Left and unprincipled. Admit it.

  130. why does the obvious bother you? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1
    if i were to say that an authoritarian police state acts like an authoritarian police state? why is this such an emotional point for you? it sems like something academic and obvious to me. and you come at me like i'm a neocon propagandizer. why is this the tone you take with me about what is pretty stone cold obvious truth?

    if i assume you live in a democracy, you and i benefit from the ability to call gw bush a moron. i live in the usa watch: "gw bush is a moron". no one is going to arrest me. in fact, it is law in my country that i cannot be arrested for that. and if i was, a free press would raise an uproar about it

    meanwhile, if you live in china, or cuba, or iran, your words on the internet are monitored, and if you say something the authorities dislike, they can and will arrest you. if i am a cuban living in cuba and i say "fidel castro is a moron" i am subject to arrest and imprisonment.

    this is not scaremongering you twit. this is point of fact, it is in fact the law of cuba:

    here, human rights watch on freedom of expression in cuba. i got it on the first page just googling cuba and internet and freedom. this is simple academic stuff dude. human rights watch and amnesty international: are those scaremongering neocon tools of imperialism enough for you?

    does any of these words below from human rights watch sway you? these are laws, on the books in cuba, that have been enforced:

    Crimes Against Public Authorities and Institutions

    Justice Minister Roberto Díaz Sotolongo acknowledged to Human Rights Watch Cuba's interest in protecting its "king" from insults. Cuba's criminalization of insults of public officials, public monuments, mass organizations, and thecountry's dead heroes represents an extraordinary government effort to deny freedom of speech.

    Contempt for the Authority of a Public Official

    Cuba's provision regarding contempt for authority (desacato) penalizes anyone who "threatens, libels or slanders, defames, affronts (injuria) or in any other way insults (ultraje) or offends, with the spoken word or in writing, the dignity or decorum of an authority, public functionary, or his agents or auxiliaries." Such actions are punishable by three months to one year in prison, plus a fine. If the person demonstrates contempt for "the President of the Council of the State, the President of the National Assembly of Popular Power, the members of the Council of the State or the Council of Ministers, or the Deputies of the National Assembly of the Popular Power, the sanction is deprivation of liberty for one to three years."82 While the crime of contempt for authority (desacato) existed in Cuba prior to the 1959 revolution, the Castro government expanded the definition to cover a broader possible range of speech and to apply explicitly to the government's highest authorities. More troubling still, the Castro government also eliminated a pre-revolutionary provision that allowed those charged with contempt to invoke the truthfulness of their statements as a defense.83

    Cuba has prosecuted scores of Cubans for contempt, including several prisoners who were tried on the basis of having criticized prison conditions and abuses.84 In January 1997, Cuban police arrested one of Cuba's prominent dissident leaders, Héctor Palacios Ruíz, the president of the Democratic Solidarity Party (Partido Solidaridad Democratica, PSD). In September 1997, a Havana court convicted him of contempt for the authority of Fidel Castro and sentenced him to eighteen months, which he served. Ironically, he had challenged the likelihood of President Castro complying with the Viña del Mar Declaration, a document endorsing human rights and democracy that Cuba's leader had signed at the Sixth Ibero-American Summit in Chile in November 1996.85

    Defamation of Institutions, Mass Organizations, Heroes, and Martyrs The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "pub

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:why does the obvious bother you? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Thank you, you've demonstrated you can't actually support your claim with real-world examples. That's all I wanted to know.

    2. Re:why does the obvious bother you? by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      if i were to say that an authoritarian police state acts like an authoritarian police state? why is this such an emotional point for you? it sems like something academic and obvious to me. and you come at me like i'm a neocon propagandizer. why is this the tone you take with me about what is pretty stone cold obvious truth?

      Because he's also a propagandizer, and a propagandizer is not allowed to expose any weakness in the armor. For example, not allowed to acknowledge Cuba's human rights record as an especially big problem. Instead, when faced with such a situation, he's willing to argue success on a very small point (the 'cuban arrested for posting on Internet') while ignoring defeat on the far far larger issue (Cuba's terrible record on freedom of speech/press). When ignoring the bigger issue is no longer possible, the propagandizer simply claims victory over the minor issue and ends the discussion.

      A good portion of political debate ends up in such arguments these days.

  131. exactly by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    if chavez uses 10% of his petrodollars helping the poor, he has my support. because its better than 0%, which is pretty much what you get with the alternative crony nepotistic corrupt government

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  132. VIVA LA WALMART PRICE REDUCTION! by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    teehee

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  133. Re:News for Nerds by das_schmitt · · Score: 0
    The increasing inclusion of 'mainstream' news is definitely diluting the waters here.

    Then fuck off. Thanks ^_^

  134. Re:News For Nerds by cthulu_mt · · Score: 1

    Spell check built into Firefox: Priceless.

    Being forced to us IE7 at work: Teh suck.

    --
    Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  135. He doesn't give a shit. by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 1

    Or Fidel would want to be a Commie Zombie... Considering that he's undead, I doubt he's in any condition to give a shit about such trivial matters as politics. He just wants BRAINS, and he doesn't want to share 'em (which is rather counterrevolutionary of him).
  136. Re:You should look out for your confirmation biase by polar+red · · Score: 1

    So you would not care if you would be subjected to waterboarding?

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  137. Not entirely... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    In addition, we got a late delivery assortment of about 100,000 psychopaths, drug dealers and sundry other career criminals that have come to characterize the typical Miami experience for the better part of thirty years.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_Boatlift

    But, if not for that event, Don Johnson would never have had a career.

  138. Take a Step Back by ChipmunkDJE · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You need to widen your view.

    The ONLY reason US did ANYTHING was because Cuba was going to institute a communist system. This happened during the cold war era (late 1940's - 1991), where America's foreign policy was THE CONTAINMENT OF COMMUNISM FROM SOVIET RUSSIA. Any spread of communism around the world was seen as the expansion (or aid) of Soviet Russia.

    Part of the containment strategy is stopping the spread of communism anywhere else that it surfaced. That is why the US fought in Korea (1950-1953), Guatamala (1954), Lebanon (1958), and Vietnam (1965-1974). Cuba just fell in the line of fire.

    "They nationalized property without compensating international business" is just the reason they lay out to explain why they embargoed Cuba. The actual motive was something else.

    -Chippy

  139. Re:News for Nerds by MECC · · Score: 1
    This actually an interesting chance to see if the /. moderation system even remotely works.
    1.) Posts a fairly neutral very short (although mildly snarky) question about whether or not a mainstream media story really qualifies as "news for nerds".
    2) Moderated as a troll comment
    3) In response to a reply noting the watering down of nerd-oriented material as a result of more frequent mainstream media posts, below can be seen the reply

    Then fuck off.

    4) "Is this 'nerd news'" = troll; "Fuck Off" != troll;
    In this instance at least, /. "moderation" shows effective disfunctionality.
    I think /. moderates the comments for reasons beyond just humorous color - I think they sincerely want to cut down on cruft. However, the moderation system itself shows up as cruft. There are probably better ways to improve the quality of discussions than what they're doing now.
    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
  140. au contraire by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As the recent independence of Kosovo (a few years following the 1999 US-led bombing campaign) shows, the U.S. is still the world's policeman.

  141. How about this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is impossible for anybody to say anything about the "failure" of popsicle stick treehouses, because noone has implemented a true one. Whenever anybody tries, noone builds them right and they've always fallen apart at the first storm or whenever anybody climbs inside. The only thing that people have tested are poorly made popsicle stick treehouses.

    1. Re:How about this one by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      With enough popsicle sticks one can make a pretty strong house, so yes you are right. Hell, I've seen thatched roofs withstand two hurricanes in one season. It's fairly similar to that old saying, if you put a big enough engine on it, you can fly anything. The shuttle is living proof ot that. I'm not discussing efficiency. I'm talking about possibility. I realize that getting people to see past their personal desires is a much bigger task than any of that, but it is possible.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:How about this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize that getting people to see past their personal desires is a much bigger task than any of that, but it is possible.
      Don Quixote would be proud of you. In the meantime, the rest of us (for whom practicalities and real results are more important than wistfully naive pie-in-the-sky possibilities) will work on solving real problems and real solutions.
    3. Re:How about this one by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Nice cop out. All your status-quo politicians would be proud of you. You serve them well.

      --
      What?
    4. Re:How about this one by Dingbat1066 · · Score: 1

      Interesting that you call people "cop outs" when you engage in the ultimate cop out - proposing ideas rooted in nothing but pure idealism without any practical means to achieve them.

  142. Re:News For Nerds by stoolpigeon · · Score: 1

    Just pointing out that the Helms-Burton acts specifically mentions Fidel and Raul by name. Some people seem to think the moment Fidel is somewhat out of the way, that everything gets better. It's going to take longer than that. I'm not saying 50 more years or something, but significant change wont happen in the next week either.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  143. Re:News For Nerds by stoolpigeon · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it's a beautiful place. I'd love to be able to visit there without breaking the law. I think it's quite possible that I will be able to someday.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  144. Re:News for Nerds by calebt3 · · Score: 1

    I don't listen to radio, don't have television, and I don't visit any news sites with any regularity (and usually because Slashdot linked to it, but in that case I don't bother to browse through the articles). So yes, that is what I am saying.

  145. Re:those countries could benefit from some sociali by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no a such thing as "hugo chavez's brand of socialism". The Hugo Chavez's regime is just plain banana fascism, with certain shades of supposed leftism.

  146. I worry. by skulgnome · · Score: 1

    I worry for the Cuban people. It is said that Raul would like to follow China's example in economic "liberalization", i.e. he might end up subjecting the people of Cuba to the same kind of brutal, nominally communist corporate state structure as is present in the China of today.

    But I also hope that Raul, or whomever follows Fidel, will instead take plays from Hugo Chavez' book, i.e. steps toward actual democracy that involves the people as democracy should. It's a slim hope, but, well. Chavez does have quite a bit of economic influence around there, what with the oil and all, and a nice trading partner could very well pull Cuba in a more democratic direction.

    In neither of these cases will Cuba roll over to US demands. The people would surely revolt.

  147. I had no idea by Nexus7 · · Score: 2

    Can you direct me to some statements/postings/blogs by someone who could be considered "left" and who wants the US to be more like Cuba (in terms of individual liberties, free market, and all that; and not more like Cuba in terms of health care)?

    Wouldn't that be, as stated in this thread, more of a fringe opinion?

  148. Knock knock. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

    They do business with Europe, they do business with Latin American countries. The fact that they have those european-hotels has not facilitated in any means that a normal cuban can spend the night there You could say that about every western hotel from Cairo to Cape Town. Perhaps we should detain and fine Americans for traveling to Africa. I mean, what normal African could possibly stay HERE? Hell, what "normal" AMERICAN could stay there when the cheapest rack rate makes the Ritz Carlton look like Motel-6? Yes, there is injustice in the world great and small. The Cuban embargo and travel restriction is an injustice. Does it outweigh whatever perceived oppression you feel the average Cuban suffers? Who knows. The fact is, there are people FAR more oppressed than the Cubans who have not been blessed with the criminalization of Americans traveling to and trading with their countries.

    1. Re:Knock knock. by yorugua · · Score: 1

      The Cuban embargo and travel restriction is an injustice. The fact is, there are people FAR more oppressed than the Cubans who have not been blessed with the criminalization of Americans traveling to and trading with their countries.

      So then, why worry! They are better then with the embargo!, or what, how could the end of the embargo benefit them?

      The fact is, there are people FAR more oppressed

      As you put it: "Does it outweigh whatever perceived oppression you feel the average *insert oppresed people here* suffers?".

      The fact that they have been needesly oppressed by the same dictator for almost 50 years in my own continent does ring me a bell. So you mean that by looking and grasping another form of suffering I'll let it go?

      From other point of view: these people might have a chance of changing something now that a (can we agree on? ) a dictator and assassin is actually going away of power, which those "FAR more oppressed" countries do not have. So what are we going to tell them? Since they are FAR less oppressed, in terms of whatever scale, they should bag it? Won't be more inspiring if they actually change something for the better? Or the goal is for we all to reach an arranged and pre-stablished level of oppression considered "ok" so we can not look how other ideas are working, or put ours on the table without fear, and see what happens?

      There's a nice book about these issues: "El manual del perfecto idiota latinoamericano" (I don't mean that personally). Don't know if it is available in english.

  149. Minor nitpick by dbIII · · Score: 1

    to the Taliban in Afghanistan against USSR

    The Taliban didn't exist back then. They are what you get from men that grow up in a brutal refugee camp and then impose the order of a brutal refugee camp on an entire country.

    Anyway your words will have little impact on those that think Ollie North was a hero for running guns to Iran and skimming some cash off the top for a car and air conditioning for his house.

  150. fidel, not very fidel... by slew · · Score: 1

    Angel Castro came to cuba from spain as an army grunt, stayed in cuba after the war started a successful sugar cain business...

    Fidel was basically born in cuba with a sliver spoon in his mouth, went to law school and became a revolutionary...

    Not too similar... But...

    Angel had a couple kids, and then went on and had a few more kids out of wedlock (inc Fidel and Raul...

    But like his father, Fidel also had a child out of wedlock (Alina)...

    So the son was somewhat like the father in that respect...

  151. Re:News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a troll. Therefore moderation worked.

  152. Here's a likely scenario by endall · · Score: 1

    My prediction:
    Raul liberalizes emigration from Cuba which, of course, helps major league baseball. The new Cuban baseball players drive the American players out of their jobs. Since the Americans don't have health insurance any more, they head to Cuba to deal with their lingering elbow and shoulder injuries. This triggers a slump in the US medical industry causing massive nurse layoffs, plummeting medical prices, and finally culminating in the complete collapse of the US health care system. Then Stan recruits Micheal Moore to try to fix things, Kenny dies because he can't get to Cuba, and Cartman accidentally saves the day while pursuing yet another amoral narcissistic scheme. Then we all learn something. Yeah. That's it.

  153. Vouchers by Morosoph · · Score: 1
    There is, of course, a way for property to be both given and sold, and that is vouchers deemed valid only for the sell-off.

    This should avoid inflationary effects.

    1. Re:Vouchers by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > vouchers deemed valid only for the sell-off. This should avoid inflationary effects.

      I'd be interested in hearing an explanation for *why* that would avoid the problems normally associated with populist redistribution-of-property measures. Because my instincts tell me that it is the sudden redistribution of property itself that is the problem, not the method by which it is redistributed.

      Macroeconomics is a bit complicated, so I could be missing something, but as I understand it this is what happens: the sudden redistribution of property creates a situation where most of the people with the property (whether we're talking land, capital goods, whatever, the principle is the same) are relatively new owners with little experience, and so they have a lot of warm fuzzy ideas in their heads but little practical knowledge about how to harness the property in question as a means of production. Consequently, the tax base contracts markedly. The government then finds itself with inadequate revenue to pay for the services the people are demanding, so they either just print all the money they need (which directly expands the money supply, the most obvious, direct, and well-understood way to create inflation that there is) or else finance everything with large amounts of foreign debt, eroding international public confidence in the nation's government and currency and driving exchange rates into a nasty tailspin that leads to hyperinflation. Or the government can drastically reduce the public services it provides, but that can be politically very hard to do and can lead to a revolution or, in the case of an elected government, it generally gets someone elected next term who promises to bring back the services by whatever means necessary, and that puts you back in your hyperinflationary spiral.

      Also, sudden redistribution of property risks eroding public confidence (both nationally and internationally) in the security of property rights in your country. Foreign private-sector investment in anything and everything in your country can dry up real fast. The risk of this is rather smaller when the property being redistributed was formerly state-owned than when it was privately owned, but it's still something you want to be careful about. International public opinion can jump to conclusions and you have to deal with the consequences.

      As I said, giving the stuff to the people sounds nice on the surface, but it's not advisable, at least not without a great deal of study and caution, because sudden redistribution like that can have some quite nasty unpleasant economic side effects.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  154. Cubans leaving Cuba by Descalzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But people who bring up Cubans trying to leave Cuba seem to conveniently forget the never ending tidal wave of illegal economic migrants from supposedly "free" countries like Mexico and the rest of Latin America, who far outnumber the Cuban migrants. People from poor countries will try to get into rich countries. There's nothing interesting or controversial about that.
    One important difference is that the Mexican government is actively facilitating flight from its country to the USA. Cuba is trying to stop it. Mexicans are indeed "free"-er than Cubans: free to leave.
    Another important difference is that it is much easier to get from Mexico to the USA than it is from Cuba to the USA.

    What many in the US cannot understand is that most Cubans genuinely like Fidel.
    Every Cuban I've ever talked to about Castro and the communist government of Cuba is filled with hatred. These people are not happy with anything about their country's government. Mexicans don't have such hatred in their speech about their president. They admit the Mexican government is corrupt, but they don't talk like Cubans do about government. I figure if it were just economic 'pull' from the US that brought Cubans here then we wouldn't have this huge disparity.
    (Let me acknowledge here that my poll is far from scientific. In fact since every Cuban I've spoken to has been living in the USA voluntarily, I'd guess we wouldn't find too many that want to be in Cuba)
    --
    I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
  155. Where have we heard this before? by tcgroat · · Score: 1

    "I neither will aspire to nor will I accept -- I repeat -- I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief."

    Castro's phrasing is an echo of LBJ's retirement announcement:

    "Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President."

  156. Re:News For Nerds by syousef · · Score: 1

    They're just actors.

    For goodness sake man. That might be what it says on their tax return, but if you acknowledge that you only encourage them to continue to "act" very very poorly.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  157. Canadians are strong allies with Cuba by biggknifeparty · · Score: 1

    Canadian love to travel to Cuba precisely because there are no asshole American tourists there to deal with. I just hope they "Keep the Yanks OUT!" (Now I have travelled and met many very nice americans who are educated and are not douchebags, however, they, in my personal experience seem to be the minority)

    1. Re:Canadians are strong allies with Cuba by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Ever been to Wildwood, NJ? Canadian tourists can be assholes too, you know.

      I'll grant you that I am often embarrassed by my fellow Americans while on the road, but I have to say that it may just be there are so many of us. I've certainly run into some embarrassing Brits, too - especially if there is any sort of a soccer match on.

      I live in NYC, and in general the European tourists are pretty cool. A little too quick to stop in the middle of the busy sidewalk to take a picture, but that's true of the American tourists as well. :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  158. If you'd like to learn more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want to read about the true reasons behind many of the political events of today, or find a discussion on the federal reserve, the economy, and the political system, check out: http://goldenagora.com/

  159. your standard of proof by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    about the ironclad fact of cuba's longstanding oppression of free expression is a standard of proof no reasonable person requires

    what exactly is your agenda here?

    because you obviously have no intent of seeking the truth of the matter on cuba's attitude towards freedom of expression. you are merely posturing in a legalistic and desparate manner. why? i don't know. i quoted from human rights watch above. what are your thoughts on the substance in those quotes? would you care to comment on those quotes. i don't think so, you're functioning on pure stubbornness

    declare bankruptcy fool

    for you are truly stupid and insane

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:your standard of proof by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      I really don't know why you're bothering to rant on... and on... and on. It's very simple: you made a claim that the Cuban government goes out and arrests any citizen who makes a disparaging comment about the government on the internet. I asked you for proof. You didn't provide any. You provided plenty of examples of *other* violations of human rights, and yay you. Congratulations. But you've provided absolutely no substance to back your original assertion.

      So, either you were lying, or you were deliberately exaggerating while stating your claim as fact. The former is stupid and dishonest, and the latter is devious. Either way, your comments can only be counterproductive. After all, as you say, clearly the Cuban government is mistreating it's people. Why the need to lie and exaggerate? Or can't you just state the facts and let them speak for themselves?

      In short: either make claims backed with facts, or shut the fuck up.

  160. Cuban-American Lobby by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    They are called the CANF and you are correct, every candidate is subject to their lobby.

    Check them out.

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  161. Me too by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    That makes two of us!

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  162. I would think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is what the AC is saying, we should count the cost of life, not the cost of American Lives.

  163. Should we ebargo the US then? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The US supported rightist guerrillas.

    Why Cuba can't protect their airspace?

    International contempt? No, really, I am sure there are more countries that have supported Cuba all these years than countries that haven't, you make it look like there is total unanimity about the condemnation of Cuba's regime, which could not be further from the truth.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  164. OK, you want only half of the truth... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... believe the expatriates only.

    There are plenty of Cubans that are committed to their Revolution and to the way things are, but of course that muddles the US view of world affairs which is black and white, with us or against us nonsense, that your current President so idiotically embraced publicly and wholeheartedly.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:OK, you want only half of the truth... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      It's been my reading of history that people care about revolutions up until about ten minutes after they're over, and everyone comes to the realization that they've replaced old goons with new goons. A revolution that requires the jailing of political dissidents isn't worth a damn, I'm afraid. That's what makes the US Revolution so unique, it was a revolution by people that believed in the rule of law, in liberty and in justice, and not just in beating the old bastards and ingratiating yourself at the expense of the people you were supposed to be freeing.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  165. Re:News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure. Maybe now you will be able to get *decent* Software... from us the cuban nerds ;) If you like superlightning fast speed beasts turning on/off little light bulbs then is not news for you.

  166. Emphasis in Cuban medicine is prevention not cure. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    And although you are correct regarding the lack of medicine you can go and check the WHO website for general health statistics, many of which beat developed countries, including the US.

    Things are far from perfect, but talking about lack of medicines is nitpicking since health services are much more than that.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  167. Worst than US getthos? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Cubans are in good general health and can read.

    That is more than you can say about many poor USians...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  168. Foreign entrepreneurs have been arrested. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The US has had the gall to arrest foreign entrepreneurs that are not doing business with the US but do with Cuba.

    They also forbid any subsidiary or companies doing business with the US to do business with Cuba.

    That is what the blockade means. Only by the most difficult legal contraptions a company can do safely business in Cuba without the idiocity of the US foreign policy immediately kicking in.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  169. I have been in Namibia by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    And the black people have only good things to say about the Cuban assistance received from Angola.

    It is amazing that you don't know who they were fighting. If given a choice between apartheid and communism I would chose communism any day, specially if I wasn't "Aryan"...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  170. Castro had compromises to make. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    You can say whatever you want about him, but he genuinely tried to improve the situation of the people in general.

    He was constrained by the paranoid world view of the US, and as demonstrated by the case of Guatemala, and Chile, a democracy with a government of the wrong flavor simply had no chance to survive the attacks orchestrated by the US political elite.

    Had Castro allowed normal democracy the US would have infiltrated parties, the media and if necessary, would have supported right wing guerrillas (like it was done in Nicaragua, even if Ronald Regan could not remember it). Under such environment only a tight political control will allow you to survive.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  171. Destruction caused by communism? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Don't be disingenuous.

    The US embargo castigated Cuba in a way that no other communist country was.

    We can't possibly know how much blame to appropriate to the US embargo or to economic mismanagement by the Cuban government.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  172. Everybody that knows about health development ... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... know that Cuban progress is real.

    The Cuban approach is prevention, not cure, something many countries, the US included, could learn from.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  173. it's petrodollar socialism. if you don't like it, stop american soccer moms from filling their gas guzzling suvs, then chavez will go away. and for every criticism you have of chavez, and i agree with many of them (although he seems like just a loud mouth gasbag to me), if he funnels petrodollars to raise living standards in venezuela, i give him a wide latitude on any number of crimes you accuse him of. the alternative to chavez would just line the pockets of his cronies, and not give any petrodollars to the poor

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  174. Before you call people "racist"... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

    ...read more carefully.

    "Cuba" not "Cubans". Ugh. It's like I'm trapped in a Fox news interview.

  175. rest of the quote by blakecraw · · Score: 1

    "I neither will aspire to nor will I accept -- I repeat -- I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief," Looks like they left out the rest of the quote: "Say 'ello to my little brother"

  176. Re:I saw we temporarily drop the embargo for 2 mon by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    While it has not eradicated the human rights issues, it has been a continual incentive for change.

  177. Re:News For Nerds by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    Who says we're civilized? You realise that we have no social safety net for the poor, and no universal health care, right?

    There are likely third world countries without electricity or running water that are more civilized than us.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  178. Re:News For Nerds by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    I'm sure of it, but that still doesn't make them news.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  179. Re:News For Nerds by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    Well, I don't know. The guy who designed this bridge is/was an engineer, even though I'd not want to drive my car across any of his bridges.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  180. Re:Emphasis in Cuban medicine is prevention not cu by dbrutus · · Score: 1

    The WHO health statistics are reported by the Cuban government. There is no independent check available. The communist system, of which Cuba is one of the last surviving examples, is famous for lying through their teeth on these stats and when the iron curtain came down, we found out that even pessimistic conservative estimates often understated the pathology.

    So I should believe the WHO stats, why?