Slashdot Mirror
In Breakthrough, US and Cuba To Resume Diplomatic Relations
HughPickens.com writes: Peter Baker reports at the NYT that in a deal negotiated during 18 months of secret talks hosted largely by Canada and encouraged by Pope Francis, the United States will restore full diplomatic relations with Cuba and open an embassy in Havana for the first time in more than a half-century. In addition, the United States will ease restrictions on remittances, travel and banking relations, and Cuba will release 53 Cuban prisoners identified as political prisoners by the United States government. Although the decades-old American embargo on Cuba will remain in place for now, the administration signaled that it would welcome a move by Congress to ease or lift it should lawmakers choose to. "We cannot keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. It does not serve America's interests, or the Cuban people, to try to push Cuba toward collapse. We know from hard-learned experience that it is better to encourage and support reform than to impose policies that will render a country a failed state," said the White House in a written statement. "The United States is taking historic steps to chart a new course in our relations with Cuba and to further engage and empower the Cuban people."
Long overdue. Time for cigars and mojitos all around!
"Oh oh, our cigars suck. Ummmmm...hide!"
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I wonder if it's any accident that this happened AFTER the mid-term elections, but well before the 2016 presidential election season really gets underway...
(You think Christmas comes early? Hah!)
Cuban exiles are a big voting block in a big battleground state, but obviously somebody decided to risk kicking this hornets' nest now in the hopes that the furor will die down by 2016.
It is Cuban policies that make Cuba a failed state, not American policies.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Did they just lock in 25 points against Hillary?
It is a good thing. But florida may not take it very well...
US Government: hey cuba, since most of our refugees over 60 that remember why we shitlisted you are either dead or accidentally disenfranchised after the latest voter registration law, wanna kiss and make up?
Cuban Government: *sigh* sure. russia quit returning our phonecalls about 20 years ago anyway. Hey thanks for not making a huge deal out of castros death
US Government: yeah no problem. thanks for letting us run a torture prison in your country without complaining about it
Cuban Government: yeah.....that.....
Good people go to bed earlier.
Great! I've always wanted to visit Cuba. My parents honeymooned there back in 1955. A trip to Havana has been on my bucket list since I was a boy, but the US government has always made it difficult and only questionably legal since I was born.
"We cannot keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. It does not serve America's interests, or the Cuban people, to try to push Cuba toward collapse. We know from hard-learned experience that it is better to encourage and support reform than to impose policies that will render a country a failed state," said the White House in a written statement.
So would the same people that support this move also say we should have continued with "constructive engagement" vis a vis South Africa during apartheid rather than imposing the punitive sanctions that were demanded by many left-of-center folks?
#DeleteChrome
Well, this has been about 30 years overdue.
If Cuban goods, especially cigars, were to ever become legal, it would spoil the impact of innumerable movie and TV scenes. I for one support locking this country off and grinding it into the ground.
You mean the US stopped behaving like a petty child and decided to grow the fuck up.
Yeah, we have them on the ropes! Another 55 years should do the trick for sure!
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Um, because it's clearly not working? The whole "towards collapse" is simply a face-saving measure.
We deal with worse governments (in terms of "communism" or totalitarianism) every day, and they're our (nominal) allies. The whole Cuba thing is just a 50 year long pout. Nobody cares anymore. There's not some super-villian running Cuba that will destroy the American Way of Life if we join the rest of the world in trading with them.
We are pushing Russia because we disagree with their tactics in the Ukraine. From this year, not from 50 years ago. Totally different condition.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I mean, really. This can't happen. The cigar industry is going to object because now they can't gouge on real or fake Cuban cigars!
Yes, exactly. They are as poor as a Socialist economy can be and, had it not been for Russia's support, would've collapsed long ago.
May as well, for all we should care. No skin off our back. But Fidel is unlikely to last that much longer, and this sort of regimes tend to change dramatically with each new Dear Leader.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Well, Iraq was pushed to collapse. That did not go so well. Syria was pushed to collapse. Not ideal either.
Burma/Myanmar was not pushed to collapse, and instead relations were softened. That is going fairly well.
I am not sure the push-to-collapse strategy has any successes to its name. Well possibly Germany 1945.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
What evil? Cuba's about as evil as the little girl down the street, and I've never seen her carrying physics text books at night.
Cuba's got some oppression sure, but it's not like the US is torture-free either.
Obama took a look at the states we have had near-permanent bad relations with, Iran and Cuba, and decided it doesn't always have to be this way.
If Russia were to actually collapse, it would be an extremely bad thing for the west. It would mean wars and it would mean big increases in terrorism exported from the region, and not just from Chechnya.
Iraq collapsed. How's that working out for US interests?
This space intentionally left blank
We found useful amounts of oil off the Cuban coast not terribly long ago. It just took this long for the oil companies in this country to put enough pressure on the US government to move towards "normal" relations.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
When Comrade Fidel gets a cold, the doctors that treat him are flown in from Spain via charter jet.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
We've proven to the world that we are willing to significantly impact the economy of a small island nation for over 50 years because they cooperated with our enemies.
Despite Cuba having an excellent education system, most people there live in poverty. Is that the Cuban government's fault, or because the door to the largest marketplace was slammed shut on them?
It's not all rainbows and unicorns, most Cuban immigrants over the years expressed serious dissatisfaction with Castro's government. Maybe the people that stayed behind were happy with it, but I suspect it has more to do with circumstances preventing those people from leaving than an acceptance of their government.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
What do you mean? The country was then conquered within months by us. Saddam Hussein himself was then captured, tried publicly, and executed deservingly.
Seeing that happen, Muamar Qaddafi relented too — without costing us another dollar or a drop of blood.
That the current Administration managed to destroy those successes by pulling from Iraq too soon and hunting down Qaddafi on made-up pretexts is a shame, but that does not mean, the original plan was flawed.
The only alternatives to such slow suffocation are: a) military intervention; b) pretending, it is Ok. Which do you prefer?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Obama pulled us out too soon from the collapsed country. That was a mistake, not the bringing upon the collapse (of Saddam Hussein's regime) itself.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The curse is that a small few are about to make huge profits on land and state enterprises. I don't care how the laws will be worded, any time you have a major economic shift like this, opportunists will take incredible advantage of the situation.
The other curse is that Western 'culture' - McDonald's, Burger King, Coke and Pepsi will invade. They will do tremendous harm to the health of the average Cuban.
Lastly, the wonderful beaches and hotels will be overrun. Cuba is so close to the U.S. that development will explode and tourism will skyrocket. The 'pristine' aspect of Cuba will quickly disappear in a morass of tawdry tourist traps.
Adios Cuba viejo y bienvenido al futuro.
*** Don't be dull.***
Let's look at an "evil government" index to determine the "evilness" of Cuba among authoritarian regimes. A good one is the Democracy Index put out by the Conservative economics journal "The Economist".
Cuba ranks at 124, which puts it in the top 20% of authoritarian regimes, so 80% of them are "more evil". We certainly don't do any business with those 80% do we? Near the bottom of that list is our old friend Saudi Arabia, a regime we absolutely should not support right? Others in the "evil 80%" are Nigeria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Tunisia, China, Qatar, Oman, Vietnam, and the UAE. No way we do we have diplomatic relations, do any business, or offer any support to any of those guys!
Of course six of these Evil Nations have oil, which makes everything good, correct? Well, it turns out that Cuba has useful offshore oil as well, so geology automatically promotes them to Tolerable Oil Nation, even if their much higher democracy ranking does not.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
The flood of retirement age MDs may bring house calls back.
I'm sorry, but increasingly it's hard not to see the US as evil.
Because they've decided it's their right to spy on everyone else on the planet, bomb civilians as collateral damage, and engage in some pretty nasty crap. America has become the enemy of the freedom and rights of everyone else on the planet, but you keep acting like you're the fucking saviors of man kind, and the Champions of Liberty and Justice. That's completely delusional.
This moronic "Yarg, teh communists are teh evil and god said we must kill them" is getting tired.
Are you seriously saying "hey, let's destroy the lives of all Cubans so we can get regime change"? because if that's the case, suddenly I think America needs a regime change
The hysteria of the 60s is 5 decades behind you. Why don't you learn a little about the facts instead of just spouting gibberish?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
WTF are you tlaking about? What 'evil'? What 'therapy'?
Clearly you know NOTING about Cuba, so stop saying idiotic things.
The Goal we have for Russia is different then the one we have for Cuba, you simpleton.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'm going to be the devil's advocate here:
Do we REALLY want to push Russia towards collapse? Think about it. Putin is a saber rattling leader... but Russia is a lot freer than it was in the '80s, and people are going to rally around Putin than face queues for bread again.
Russia is in a very tough geopolitical spot. Here in the US, we have Canada which has been a peaceful neighbor for centuries. We have Mexico which is a grudging ally even though we have shat on that country time and time again. However, Russia has a lot of countries that hate them, hate Russians, and would go to war at a moment's notice the second they see -any- weaknesses they can exploit. People don't see it on Fox News on the US, but thousands of Russians get killed due to insurgent attacks. Russia has to keep a brutal appearance or else they will just get overrun, as Russia's strength isn't in numbers.
If Russia collapses, it will make the Middle East conflict look tiny. Other countries bordering Russia would be more than happy to take chunks of Russian land, be it China deciding to add some more territory like they did with Tibet. The radical Islamists who constantly attack Russia would set up another ISIS if they could take any land at all, then there would be fighting to see who can hold that land, which all will wind up in the most sociopathic, brutal person in the region.
Do we want Russia a grudging partner on the geopolitical scene, or do we want to see its carcass being fought over by extremely brutal, violent warlords, with the entire world either joining the fight directly to protect interests? A failed Russia WILL result in a new World War.
This already has happened after WWI, and the US actually seized parts of Russia (Murmansk, Archangelsk) while driving the Japanese away.
Russia toppling will 100% become a CK class scenario at the minimum, reorganizing the entire geopolitical power spectrum of the world. There is a very high chance it will be even worse... an XK class scenario as every country in the world gets drawn into the conflict of who gets or who does not get Russia's resources. Even countries that have little to no interest will get drawn in due to treaties.
There are a lot of things I'd rather see happen... but a collapsed Russia isn't one of them.
Some of us care about other human beings. If you can't get that, then please take a long walk off a short pier.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Pushing Germany to collapse after WW1 was an incredible success! We need more successes like that!
I really hope you're being sarcastic. Otherwise, you're a pretty horrible human being to wish that kind of treatment on entire populations you've never even met.
Related to Cheney, perhaps?
Why would Chechnya "export" terrorism?
Sorry, seems you have not much clue. Chechnya is a nation that tries to separate from Russia.
During WW II the chechnic "terror attacks" would have been called "commando attacks", sure getting civilians as hostages in a theatre is a bit over the edge, but the germans, the spanish and the italian _REGULAR TROOPS_ did the exact same during WW II and the Spanish Revolution wars.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
"Some" oppression? What a wonderful understatement... You have to register with police — and get their permission — just to travel from one town to another...
Yeah, this was the first thing, that struck me upon moving to America 20 years ago. Your ready willingness to equate the petty misdeeds of your country's government with the gross human rights violations of others. To you and yours, McCarthy — who caused a hundred or so people (most of them actual Communists) to lose their jobs — is equivalent to Beria, who killed millions.
What little torture we did use, was applied to enemies — and most of us are duly ashamed of it anyway. The worst, that political opposition has to fear in the US, is an IRS audit. Do you understand, what's going to happen to a Cuban questioning Fidel's competence?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The Iraqi successes were pretty well destroyed before the current administration even took office. And if it requires 10+ years of US military occupation for a country to recover from "collapse", how is that exactly good for us (or them)?
The hysteria of McCarthyism hasn't gone anywhere, it's just found a different topic to obsess over and a different target.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
It is "good" simply because it is better than the alternatives: a) remain under Saddam Hussein; b) be taken over by ISIS (or Iran).
10 years is not that long — had we pulled out from Western Germany in 1955, for example, that country (with plenty of Nazis still inside and USSR's massive armies right across the border) too would've been in deep trouble.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
We traded three convicted murderers of Americans for one kidnapped aid worker. It was a deal Bergdahl would have applauded, but all it did was paint a target on the back of any American visiting a country that now knows it can extort anything it wants out of Obama because he's a nitwit.
My god, are you that delusional?
You toppled a government, but you sure as hell didn't "conquer" them.
You barely got out of there with your asses intact, and every single justification for going in there in the first place was provably false before anybody got sent in. Oh, and your inept fumbling about led to the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians -- far far more than were killed in 9/11.
The entire reason for being in Iraq the second time was a colossal lie perpetuated by a chimpanzee of a president trying to finish what daddy started.
You were in the wrong fucking country, because Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11. And now you've left a giant power vacuum which has destabilized the entire region.
Being in Iraq was such an epic failure that only people who can call it a success were the private companies who made huge profits, and the lying bastards who got you in there in the first place.
If you think that's a template for how to fix the worlds problems ... the world doesn't want any more of your "help".
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Vice-President is traditionally nominated for the next Presidency by the same pary — unless (like Cheney) he explicitly rejects such plans from the very beginning.
I doubt, Joe Biden will score even so much as a nomination — despite his desires — which will, of course, be even more embarrassing for the Democrats, than him losing the subsequent election.
No, I don't think, Obama sincerely cares about his nominal "Number 2"... It was a marriage of convenience — the man was supposed to "bring foreign policy heft" to the ticket. Ha-ha-ha...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
What has changed in Cuba after the announcement?
Cuban citizens are still not permitted to speak or read freely or do anything freely without the fear of imprisonment or even death. Cuba is no closer to becoming a democracy and you have to wonder if this move will embolden other tyrants to take Americans hostage in order to win concessions.
U.S. policy towards Cuba was codified into law under the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996, and the Trade Sanctions Reform Act of 2000. The policy changes announced by the President are an overreach of his executive powers under the law. The official legislative history of the law clarifies that the President has power to tighten economic sanctions, but not to ease them beyond the baseline set on March 1, 1996.
BTW, Gross was an aid worker. He was traded for 3 convicted spies. It looks like Obama didn't learn anything from the Bergdahl trade.
Totally wrong for Cuba. The United States is pure evil and can only do that poor country harm.
You have no goal for Russia. Your country is pure evil and must be removed from the Earth.
Of course, we did.
There are more people dying from guns in Chicago, than were in Iraq.
Wrong. But off-topic...
Yes, this — withdrawal of troops for political expedience, rather than because the situation really allowed it — was a mistake, which I consider shameful.
Not at all — we did destroy Saddam Hussein's regime and caused himself to be duly punished. Iraq stopped being a threat to its neighbors and was on its way to becoming a decent country. If only we stuck around for longer...
Your other alternatives are China and Russia. Make your pick...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
"The nice thing about Secretaries of State is that there are so many of them to choose from"
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
O'Bomber finally made an effort to do something good while he was president.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
So the very polite and courteous email I received from the Cuban Foreign Office back after Hurricane Katrina will no longer be quite the unique bit of memorabilia after all?
Lest we forget, Cuba offered to send doctors and other medical assistance to help the suffering residents in New Orleans after Katrina did its thing .. and the US State Department was hardly even polite with their refusal.
http://fpif.org/bush_administr...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/...
So I emailed the Cuban Foreign Office to apologize :-) I'm sure I tripped some intelligence tripwires on that little gesture, but meh .. who cares? I, being previously assigned to the 8th Special Forces Group in Panama back in The Day, was probably on a Cuban Intelligence list or two in any event :-) Luckily everyone (Cuban and US) apparently had a sense of humor, or sense enough not to screw with the topic. Or maybe NSA wasn't quite as invasive then as now. I still thought it awfully decent of the Cuban government to respond to my unsolicited email.. startled no doubt by the "SGM, USA SF (Ret)" in my email's signature.
How did that "encourage and support reform" work for you in Iran? Oh, not so good, huh?
How did that "encourage and support reform" work for you in Russia? Oh, not so good, huh?
How did that "encourage and support reform" work for you in North Korea? Oh, not so good, huh?
How did that "encourage and support reform" work for you in Venezuela? Oh, not so good, huh?
A pox on idiots who only see what they hope and not what is.
because further hordes of boat people are not something to be desired.
Yes, exactly. They are as poor as a Socialist economy can be and, had it not been for Russia's support, would've collapsed long ago.
May as well, for all we should care. No skin off our back. But Fidel is unlikely to last that much longer, and this sort of regimes tend to change dramatically with each new Dear Leader.
Very interesting way to end that comment since North Korea has changed very little with each new leader.
Great we're going to restore relations to yet another shit-hole banana republic.
Wonder how much in foreign relations assistance money this one will cost us?
The only policies that led to Cuba being a crappy place (a failed state, as Obama put it) are the Communist policies. Our embargo is not to blame. Castro's willingness to imprison his own people is the problem. Also his embrace of failed economic policies.
Nice how Obama blames Cuba's Cuban-caused issues on US policy. Guy doesn't read much history, I guess.
We cannot keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. [or the definition of insanity sometimes attributed to Albert Einstein: "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"]
This phrase is overused.
When used in a practical sense, it's just plain false. It's "quasi-opposite" phrases "practice makes perfect" and "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again" are frequently enough true that they make using this phrase in an off-hand, not-carefully-considering-the-context way just sound stupid.
Anyway, you almost never "keep doing the same thing/do the same thing twice" in the real (analog) world anyway (which is why "try, try again" actually works), so using the phrase in a literal is almost always pointless outside of a computer or other non-analog (discrete-state) deterministic environment.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
They've outgrown the confines of Guantanamo Bay.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Said to another human being, who you don't care about.
I've heard some Canadians are unhappy about this development. Now the beautiful and cheap Cuban resorts that Canadians flock to might be overrun with Americans.
The embargo has always seemed ridiculous to me though.
when you're campaigning for sanctions against the UAE and Nigeria, and the companies that do business with them. They are both unfree states that abuse their citizens. Why the difference? Hm...
Also, "overreach"? You need to go check Drudge for updated language to parrot - you're not even making sense. He's asking Congress to change the law. Diplomacy is what the executive branch does.
Of course, the ditto heads would claim overreach when Obama takes a piss, so what else is new.
The thing in 1945 regarding Germany is both sad and sickening. I say this because it's quite apparent with all the things going on in the world today that Hitler was indeed correct. If the Germans had been victorious we would likely be far better off than we are now. This is why I consider myself to be a National Socialist. That's right, I am a Fascist and I am proud of it. They were a truly great people and culture who were light years ahead of this disgusting and degenerate "progressive"/Jewish multiculturalist tyranny we find ourselves subjected to.
Heil Hitler!
Ave Victoriam!
You should have stayed in Iraq longer the more dead American soldiers, the better. You are utterly delusional if you think invading Iraq did anything other than make the situation worse.
In a totally unrelated story, the US will continue imposing policies to create a failed state in Russia, a nation with thousands of nuclear warheads aimed at the US and Europe and a leader threatening war before surrender.
You can't make this shit up!
Does it hurt to be such a fucking moron? How does it help you or any other working stiff in this worthless fucking country (the US) to topple Saddam Hussein?
Yes, exactly. They are as poor as a Socialist economy can be and, had it not been for Russia's support, would've collapsed long ago.
May as well, for all we should care. No skin off our back. But Fidel is unlikely to last that much longer, and this sort of regimes tend to change dramatically with each new Dear Leader.
Russian economic support to Cuba ended after the Soviet Union came apart. Question is how much longer would Raul Castro last, and whether Cuba would see another Gorby after him?
"WE ARE FAMILY!!!!!" :)
Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
The mistake in Iraq was to try and rebuild that country after toppling Saddam. Invading them and toppling Saddam was justified, given that he was housing terrorists like Abu Nidal, and rewarding Hamas suicide bombers in Israel. But once he was overthrown, the campaign should have been over, while allowing the UN to search for the WMDs. When Bush stood on that ship the first time w/ the 'Mission Accomplished' sign, he happened to be correct! The US debacle in Iraq started after the scope of the mission became 'bringing democracy to Iraq'.
No Arab country had ever been a democracy, and translated to Arab ground realities, it just meant mob rule. In Iraq, the Shiites, being the majority, came to power, and suddenly, the persecution of Chaldeans & Assyrians started, w/ most fleeing to Syria and then Lebanon. In the meantime, in Baghdad, Iraq became a new client state of Iran, who must have been laughing themselves silly @ the Great Satan (TM) installing their puppet in Iraq, and making the formation of a Shiite Crescent easier.
In the meantime, the US wasted billions in reconstructing a country that never had any major infrastructure in the first place, aside from anything that would make waging war easier. All the while battling Iraqis of all ethnic backgrounds who hated it (except the Kurds and Assyrians). Instead, withdrawing from Iraq after Saddam's overthrow and letting Moqtada al Sadr battle it out with Zarqawi and not take any Arab refugees into the US would have been the right move.
You can hardly call the invasion of Iraq a conquest. It was a successful expeditionary incursion but the stated goals by the PNAC for the war were the stabilization of the Persian Gulf oil producing region and the demobilization of the troops stationed in the border since the first Gulf War. The demobilization did happen but the Persian Gulf was not stabilized at all. So in that sense the war failed to meet their objectives.
The PNAC also intended to invade North Korea at the same time but I guess the Afghan war precluded that from happening.
No the mistake was supporting the overthrow of Assad and Gaddafi. They came in from Syria remember? And they probably got to Syria via Turkey from Saudi Arabia.
I would be less concerned about Russia and more concerned about the efforts the Chinese have made to get into Cuba.
But Russia's recent wars & bullying have been against groups or countries far weaker than them - Chechens, Georgia and now Ukraine. They've not fought wars against China or Kazakhstan. Going by what you said, those 2 would theoretically be Russia's greatest threats. However, China is an ally of Russia, and their only border with them is on the Manchurian side. Kazakhistan is still more or less a client state of Russia, and hardly a threat to it. In fact, before Putin came to power, when Yeltsin was running things, there were times when Moscow had a really weak hold on things, but that didn't encourage China or the stans to act up and try bullying Russia. The only group that tried it was the Chechens.
Being in Iraq was such an epic failure that only people who can call it a success were the private companies who made huge profits, and the lying bastards who got you in there in the first place.
If you think that's a template for how to fix the worlds problems ... the world doesn't want any more of your "help".
There is one other group that can call it a success... ISIS. They wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the US meddling in Iraq and creating a power vacuum. There's a reason Hussein was kept busy between the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias. He wasn't just sitting on his hands letting his country fall apart around him, despite all the horrible methods he used to try and prevent collapse.
This wasn't solely a US decision, but was brokered between the US and Cuba by the current Pope, who has extensive experience in Cuba and working on behalf of the Cuban people. This wasn't a move made in favor of the US or the Cuban regime, but in favor of the Cuban people, restoring a large and viable US trade partner once the embargo ends (expect sugar prices to drop), and facilitating an equal exchange of prisoners. Cuba has no real discernible military might in the modern era, and since the end of the USSR, doesn't have any codependent ties to Russia or the like - besides that it's an opportune time as it's not like Russia would be able to do anything if it had an issue anyways, as the ruble is tanking.
The Cuban regime's opened up generally anyways under Raul Castro's oversight, and embargos are something of an antiquated policy considering the modern reliance instead on economic sanctions, and not wholesale embargos. The embargo did cause the economy of Cuba to suffer, as Cuba is otherwise a self-reliant nation with the majority of it's issues with infrastructure stemming from products that it could not produce itself and needed to import from elsewhere. This is, of course, not including the numerous CIA operations in Cuba over the past years, especially in the Cold War era, where the CIA would burn sugar plantations, hire terrorists to destroy airplanes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubana_de_Aviaci%C3%B3n_Flight_455), and make a near-obsessive amount of assassination attempts against Castro, considering that the US readily supported worse dictators in Pinochet.
Not to defend Cuba unduly, but American exceptionalism would absolve them of any responsibility in the issue here, when America's initial problem with Cuba wasn't its burgeoning relationship with the USSR (which largely came about thanks to the US's Monroe Doctrine rejection of any socialism in South and Central America) but the fact that the Cuban Revolution had displaced US-supported dictator Batista, and most of the efforts to 'retake' Cuba (i.e. the Bay of Pigs) were supported and lobbied for by Batistites, members of Batista's regime who were upset they were no longer in power. As Batista was a brutal dictator with the support of the US mafia and otherwise generally unpleasant, it was not initially a bad thing that Castro came to power and there's a reason why the revolution was supported.
Really, kind of every country is shit in its own little way, most people are shit, and the whole world is just a big spinning globe of shit.
Obama pulled us out too soon from the collapsed country. That was a mistake, not the bringing upon the collapse (of Saddam Hussein's regime) itself.
Iraq was already in collapse prior to the US military pulling out. ISIS was not the juggernaut it is today, but they were already strategically attacking installations and gaining members. Pulling out proved to have negative consequences, but staying there likely would have had other consequences just as bad. That's what happens when you install someone like Hussein in the first place and expect him to be an acquiescent puppet. The fact that the US had to invade the country and have him deposed when the US was responsible for him being in power in the first place seems to fly over many people's heads.
If sanctions causing collapse of an allied country don't work, what hope is there for having them with a country that nobody but you considers to be an enemy?
What do you mean? The country was then conquered within months by us. Saddam Hussein himself was then captured, tried publicly, and executed deservingly.
Yes, and look what took over after Saddam Hussein was gone. What did Bush leave Obama? Anarchy, controlled by armed gangs. Now the strongest force is the Islamic State.
von Clausowitz that the purpose of war is not to destroy the enemy, it's to accomplish policy. (However you spell it.)
Bush is like that guy in Atlas Shrugged who couldn't watch a pot of soup without letting it boil over.
sorry but i use slashdot as a news aggregator, usually i dont care what the "article" on the site says. I come for the links. where are my links???
Why would Chechnya "export" terrorism?
Sorry, seems you have not much clue. Chechnya is a nation that tries to separate from Russia.
During WW II the chechnic "terror attacks" would have been called "commando attacks", sure getting civilians as hostages in a theatre is a bit over the edge, but the germans, the spanish and the italian _REGULAR TROOPS_ did the exact same during WW II and the Spanish Revolution wars.
To answer your question: Chechnyans don't really have any reason to export terrorism -- but they DO have reason to sell munitions to those wanting to use them to overthrow western powers. And if Russia collapsed, you'd have a LOT of equipment looking for a new home. This is already a bit of an issue in Ukraine.
May as well, for all we should care. No skin off our back. But Fidel is unlikely to last that much longer, and this sort of regimes tend to change dramatically with each new Dear Leader.
Fidel Castro stepped down in 2008.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Venezuela money is comming to an end and Cuba is looking to get some from relations with USA
They were a truly great people and culture who were light years ahead of this disgusting and degenerate "progressive"/Jewish multiculturalist tyranny we find ourselves subjected to.
You missed the memo. You people are supposed to be on the Jewish side against Islam now.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
That's the difference between the Communist model and the Capitalist model: in capitalism, you generally get a single executive leader with charisma, who rises to the position because of that charisma and their politicking. They then lead as they see fit, within the bounds that have been laid out for them by the people.
In Communism, it's rule by party, not by individual; this is partly by design: if a single person dies/goes "bad" etc, the party routes around that, and keeps going as they were. It's extremely difficult to change the regime unless it is overthrown completely. Even then, if it has had time to become entrenched, things won't change all that much if it is overthrown.
Just look at Russia and China as examples: Russia's regime was pretty much overthrown from within, and yet has been replaced by Putin's regime, which isn't really all that different in many ways. China saw the writing on the wall, and made incremental changes over time such that the regime could stay entrenched while not depending too much on any person/event/change.
Personally, I'd rather Cuba take China's long and twisted route to democracy than Russia's.
That makes no sense. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the destruction of his entire army apparatus was wat created the power vacuum that ISIS is now stepping into. For all his obvious evil, Saddam Hussein managed to create a militarily and economically strong Iraq that would have made short work of any bandits trying to invade Iraq, no matter what their sales talk.
Any attempts at nation building after the Iraq invasion were at best pathetic. Cynically corrupt windowdressing is a better description. I'm sure some coalition people (for example in the US defence industry) thought his period was far too short, but the Iraqi people thought differently, despite the obvious dangers.
Iran taking over Iraq is just delusional.
Chechnyans don't really have any reason to export terrorism
Except for the fact that a lot of the ones who fought against Russia (and their pro-Russian compatriots) are fucked-in-the-head Islamists that behead, dismember and enslave people for fun. A lot of Chechens are fighting for ISIS right now. A Chechen conducted the boston bombing.
And yet, Russia is the enemy and Chechens are our friends. It's a bizarre world.
Cuba's antique car problem is a glaring example of how communism and totalitarianism (not the United States) has kept Cuba and its millions of citizens in poverty.
http://www.newsmaxworld.com/TheAmericas/cuba-cars/2014/01/04/id/545160/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/cuba-classic-car-streets-rule-change-new-purchase
No. American forces replaced that — there was no vacuum. The vacuum appeared, when we pulled out.
Citation needed.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Not true at all. Iraq was moving in the right direction, its various groups learning to talk to rather than fight rivals.
Withdrawal was grossly premature. That it was done not as an honest mistake, but for cynical political considerations ("See? I did not close Guantanamo, but I did get us out of Iraq"), makes it all the more disgusting...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The conventional wisdom that it's political suicide in Florida to support normalization of relations with Cuba just isn't true any longer. 56% of Americans in general support it. That number increases to 62% if you focus only on responses from the Hispanic/Latino community, and it increases to 63% if you just ask people from Florida.
Here's the poll.
The "angry Scarface extra" demographic in Florida is dying (both metaphorically and literally.) The times, they are a-changing.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
Iran was a democracy.. until, a country that tries to build democracies decided to topple that one.
The best time of reform, is when you are not fearful of reelection, and you are OK with using unpopular but needed reform. In this case, pretty it is much what's left for Obama. And you know what ? He might get long needed reform on the way (the cuban embargo for the last 50 years is one of the stupidiest political decision of the US, IMNSHO).
Now if somebody could really clean up that other little mess in the cuban isle before 2034-2053 that would be great.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Please tell us more. This is actually funny.
Chechnyans don't really have any reason to export terrorism
Except for the fact that a lot of the ones who fought against Russia (and their pro-Russian compatriots) are fucked-in-the-head Islamists that behead, dismember and enslave people for fun. A lot of Chechens are fighting for ISIS right now. A Chechen conducted the boston bombing.
And yet, Russia is the enemy and Chechens are our friends. It's a bizarre world.
"The enemy of my enemy is likely out to get me too, and is not to be trusted."
Not true at all. Iraq was moving in the right direction, its various groups learning to talk to rather than fight rivals.
Withdrawal was grossly premature. That it was done not as an honest mistake, but for cynical political considerations ("See? I did not close Guantanamo, but I did get us out of Iraq"), makes it all the more disgusting...
That article seems to undercut your own argument.
The war hawks in the Bush Administration, like Douglas Feith, were telling us that we could replace Saddam Hussein with our own dictator, Chalabai, like replacing a chip on a motherboard. The free-market ideologues were telling us that all we had to do was destroy Iraq's government-run industries, and replace them with the free market, and they would flourish.
Instead, the new free-market Iraqi health care system fell apart, the power system failed and couldn't supply electricity to run the air conditioners and sewer pumps, and most of all, neither the U.S. military nor the "free" Iraqi government could maintain security, against the armed sectarian gangs that started killing each other, as that Slate article described. Bush struggled in Iraq for longer than it took to win the entire WWII, and he failed. 600,000 Iraqis died, and 4,000 American troops and contractors.
Bush lost the war. At what point do you face that and cut your losses? Maybe you don't care about the 600,000 Iraqis, but do you want to lose another 4,000 Americans? Did you volunteer? Where did you earn your battle stripes?
A sad day indeed. My grandparents are rolling in their graves and the left wingers are rejoicing.
That Illiberals at Slate criticize Bush and free markets is no surprise. That they also criticize the premature withdrawal of American forces — that's noteworthy. It is like having your mama tell you, you have an ugly nose — it must be really ugly...
Bush conquered the entire country, replaced its government, captured its previous leader and handed him over to the new government to be hung by the neck. If that is still "losing", I don't know, what "winning" is...
Oh, this is so special! So only the military must have a say on matters of foreign policy? Is that your argument — or did you just get carried away with your ad hominem a little?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
"A good one is the Democracy Index put out by the Conservative economics journal "The Economist"." You have got to be shitting me. Do you actually believe the "The Economist" is a conservative publication? Please!
As a Cuban American immigrant who escaped Cuba to the US myself, I feel I have to comment on this because unfortunately most of you saying how this is such a great thing are fucking clueless.
I read someone said that people have an "antiquated view on communism". Really?
Tell that to me and my siblings who in the 90s went through a rationing period where we were only allowed to shower once a week for a few minutes while a soldier stood outside our fucking door with a gun counting down the minutes.
Tell that to my parents who had to make the choice during the rationing period to feed us toothpaste in the morning so that we would be full enough to wait until we got more food.
Tell that to my grandparents who had their entire small private tile business stripped away from them and were told "this isn't yours anymore, it belongs to government and to the people."
Tell that to my cousins who came to the US on top of a fucking car floating between Cuba and Florida.
Tell that to my dead great uncles who were DRAGGED from their house in front of their children and wives for speaking out against the new regime only to be EXECUTED by firing squads led by Raul Castro and Che Guevara. Yes, your communist piece of shit heroes.
So please go fuck your snobby, pseudo intellectual self when you tell me that my view on communism is fucking outdated. You can say whatever you want about my information and my story not being true because you've read some biased bullshit book about the "truth" of the Cuban revolution but I've fucking lived it and I can tell you personally from experience that you don't know shit.
You people stop supporting a business like Hobby Lobby or Chic-Fil-A with your money for their religious beliefs and treating their employees poorly according to your standards (which is understandable and well within your rights) because you "care about people", yet you support an open economy to give our money and support to a communist Cuban regime who have murdered, robbed, and deprived their own people of basic human rights. I thought you cared about people? Maybe you're just not educated on the history of the Cuban people and communism. Or maybe you're just full of shit.
What do you mean? The country was then conquered within months by us. Saddam Hussein himself was then captured, tried publicly, and executed deservingly.
There were over a million deaths by some estimates caused by the invasion. A million! Even if the estimates are off by half, that's an incredible number of people.
Iraq is still in chaos many years later. IS has taken over a lot of the country. The Middle East as a whole was destabilised and has yet to recover.
I'd hate to know what your definition of a catastrophe is.
What's odd is that Germany proper was never invaded. The gave up when they ran out of men. France was pounded a hell of lot harder in terms of territorial destruction than Germany.
Bush conquered the entire country, replaced its government, captured its previous leader and handed him over to the new government to be hung by the neck. If that is still "losing", I don't know, what "winning" is...
Winning, as von Clausowitz said, is accomplishing policy. One of the stated purposes of the war was to replace Saddam Hussain with a leader that was more agreeable to us, while converting Iraq into a free market economy (according to what I read on the Wall Street Journal editorial page). Douglas Feith said, it would be like installing a new chip on your motherboard.
Instead, under Bush, they dismissed the army, were unable to create a new one capable of maintaining security and safety, and were unable to maintain the economy. It's a failed state.
Bush had six years to do whatever he wanted. Roosevelt and Truman won World War II in less time. Bush didn't accomplish his goals. He created a mess, and handed it over to Obama. I can't imagine how anyone could restore order to Iraq again. It might take another 10 years, 20 years, 50 years. You can't blame that on Obama.
Well, of course, if von Clausowitz said it, it must be truth and nothing but the truth, sure...
We remained in Germany for decades after that — had we withdrawn in 1955, Germany too could've become a failed state — or be run over by USSR.
Yes, I can. And I am far from being the only one. And I'm not just talking about RethugliKKKans: even Leon Panetta was rather critical of the President over this.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Either Obama has written off the Cuban vote in Miami or he has decided to concede FLA to the GOP.
You seriously think Obama cares who wins the next election? If he cares at all, it's probably to make sure that Hillary's chances of winning are even lower than they'd be if he hadn't antagonized the GOP by this move. And that just out of a "FU Clintons" perspective, not from any ideology at all.
Obama is done with elections. Well, at least until it's time for Malia or Sascha to run. He has no votes to "write off"
Funny how a President from team A is superman who is imagined to have done everything himself while a President from team B is just the boss who says OK to what the team gives him to work with.
I suppose you are half grown up, ditch the superman fantasy and understand that both teams run like team B where the leader is just the boss and you'll be all the way there.
Wow, it's hard to believe that total fuckwits like "mi" still survive, with such poorly developed senses of reality.
Under Saddam, Iraq had free education and healthcare, just like Cuba and Libya.
ISIS would not EXIST if it weren't for the Iraq fiasco and the US funding them to attack Syria.
Believe it or not, the world WOULD be a much safer, more peaceful place, if it were not for the US.
Actually, it is in the interest of Americans to maintain the embargo. If it ends, the USA gets:
1) good cigars (to raise the cancer rates)
2) good rum (to raise the alcoholism rates)
3) cheaper sugar (to raise obesity rates)
So the US forces did create the vacuum by removing Saddam's army and then leaving.
Soon, Cuban cigar production will be industrialized to meet pent-up demand, followed by the sacrifice of quality on the altar of profit margins...
The Miracle of the Market Place!
Since nobody had the stomach to end you with a surgery, we should continue with therapy.
"My god, are you that delusional?"
You seriously haven't realized that yet, have you?
I always thought the US embargo of Cuba was a bit of hypocrisy at least in modern times, particularly after the fall of the USSR.
I mean as you say it isn't like the US is making a big deal about other nations that aren't democratic, and by any measure much much worse than Cuba, as far as human rights violations etc... China being the big one.
I guess it is more close to home physically, which probably played into it. However unfortunately I suspect it had more to do with internal domestic politics in Florida than anything else which is a bit sad. Lets punish a whole people forever to possibly win a few extra seats in a particular state. I doubt it is any coincidence that Bush killed the idea, when his brother was the governor of Florida.
Nothing personal but I really enjoyed going to Cuba as you never saw any American tourists on the beaches.
On the other hand I think normalizing relations with Cuba was way overdue.
The article lists his time in office as ending in 2011, not his death. He's still alive as far as anyone knows for sure.
Two comments. First, I expect better of the MPR audience than a bunch of personal attacks on the politicians involved ("crazy", "nut job", etc.). Where is the dialog in that? [They were discussing Rep Bachman]
Second, this Republican agrees that the [Cuban] embargo was a success, but not in the sense that it kept Cuba from profiting from its low wage workers (a form of serfdom?), but rather in the sense that Cuba was able to attempt to build a socialist paradise absent the machinations of the free world and its powerful interests. Did they succeed? If you think that universal health care at the 1950's level is success, with life expectancies comparable to US, and with a thriving black market in access to medical care for those with money (similar to ours, except that our high-payer patients subsidize the entire health industry rather than just the people they bribe), perhaps they did. If you think that a two-level economy is success (the have-nots and the tourists), perhaps they did. If you think a population with low expectations of their government and a high level of self sufficiency, perhaps they did succeed. Certainly their model of socialism is much more benign than, for example, North Korea's alleged communist system (I say alleged because NK is communist only in its choice of friends, not in its actual economic system, which is more a large slave plantation, as near as I can tell). So while I can understand a certain amount of hostility towards Cuba for their oppression of their people's freedoms, I must also acknowledge that, for a Luddite nation, they are doing much better than their Russian handlers did.
"There is no god but allah" - well, they got it half right.
I'm afraid you can't blame or give credit to Obama for that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
BS. Of course, I can blame Obama — he could have and should have gotten Iraqi government to agree for us to stay there longer — based on the new developments.
Then, of course, if you are killing suspected terrorists instead of capturing and interrogating them (so that, heaven forbid, no new prisoners appear in Guantanamo), you might not even be aware of those new developments until you see some decapitations on YouTube. Either way, the affirmative action wonder is as sorry excuse of a president, as Carter was before him...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
'... the world doesn't want any more of your "help".'
I saw a great bumper-sticker a few years ago:
"Be nice to America or we'll bring democracy to YOUR country."
And so we should all just pay more taxes because your alleged "uncle" is allegedly "very rich" and allegedly "keeps more money" from the "dirt poor on food stamps" all the while who doing nothing to contribute to society because he's vacuously "traveling the world". So naturally, everyone should agree to paying "significantly higher taxes".
Iran was NEVER a democracy. It was always a dictatorial monarchy under the various dynasties ending w/ the Pahlavis, then it became a Shiite theocracy under the Ayatollahs. Since it's Islamic, it's not likely to ever remain a democracy even if it has an odd election here or there.
Iran taking over Iraq is just delusional.
They don't have to - the current regime in Baghdad is Shiite dominated, and a good number of them, like Moqtada al Sadr, take their marching orders from Teheran
That makes no sense. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the destruction of his entire army apparatus was what created the power vacuum that ISIS is now stepping into. For all his obvious evil, Saddam Hussein managed to create a militarily and economically strong Iraq that would have made short work of any bandits trying to invade Iraq, no matter what their sales talk.
Any attempts at nation building after the Iraq invasion were at best pathetic. Cynically corrupt windowdressing is a better description. I'm sure some coalition people (for example in the US defence industry) thought his period was far too short, but the Iraqi people thought differently, despite the obvious dangers.
ISIS was a side effect of a different Western policy - a policy of encouraging enemies of various Arab dictatorships regardless of whether they were actually democratic or not. In Syria, this policy was supporting something called the 'Free Syrian Army'. Never mind that this army was a bunch of the majority Sunni population of Syria affiliated to the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, and indirectly, to al Qaeda. The support they got from Sunni regimes in the region - Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, et al helped them in eliminating Alawite control in much of the country, except the regions around Damascus & Latakia.
So, in the 2 neighboring countries - Iraq & Syria - you had disgruntled Sunnis, who then came together under the ISIS banner. No longer any claims to secularism, as under Saddam, but this time a clear declaration of a Caliphate out to take over the region, and later the world. In case one thinks I'm guilty of hyperbole, ISIS is already doing what Caliphs used to do - recognizing whichever Islamic militias in the world they like, and endorsing them. And you have Muslims from all over either going, or attempting to go to, Syria and Iraq to join ISIS.
In short, neither Conservatives nor Liberals deserve the blame for the rise of ISIS. ISIS is only what it is as a result of Muslims being Muslims.
How long should we have stayed in Iraq? It was a drag on the US economy and military capabilities. It allowed the Iraqi government to be irresponsible since the US Armed Forces would back them up. Exerting military control over Iraq caused a lot of resentment. There were plenty of reasons to leave Iraq, and apparently people who are very happy that their counterfactuals can't be refuted.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I'm interested that Tunisia is included in the list. My impression is they used to have a relatively well-meaning monarch/dictator, then the Arab Spring started there and he stepped down without violence to make way for democracy. Early days yet, but my impression is it was one of the few success stories in recent times
The strategic point of invading Iraq was to control Iran. Iraq has always been small potatoes, while Iran has been a real threat to U.S. interests in the Middle East.
The Iraq war was a failure because we took a regional counterbalance to Iran (Iraq) and turned it into a failed state. We did not create the U.S. client state with permanent military presence that Cheney and his crew wanted.