This is topic do you think that the Cuban embargo should be repealed? in forum Officers' Lounge at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/10/1351.html

Posted by D. Lerious on :
 
I feel that it should be repealed for the following reasons:
1. Castro is actually benifitting from it because he blames the situation on the embargo and uses it as an example of "Yankee agression"

2. If we can have trade with China, who also is communist, and more of a threat to us, then why not Cuba?.

3. Cuba, with its resources, could be a great market, which America is missing out on.

4. The embargo hasn't changed anything, nor will it ever. So what's the point of having it?

------------------
When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.


 


Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
 
All I'm saying right now is that I think I'll see this in the flameboard real soon.

------------------
Oh, fiddle faddle, everyone knows that our mutants have flippers. Oops, I've said too much.....
~C. Montgomery Burns

And be sure to visit The Field Marshal project http://fieldmarshal.virtualave.net/

 


Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :
 
Both Cuba and China have violated human rights numerous times. I think that we shouldn't trade with either of them. I don't care if others will profit from it.

Also, if Castro wants to start trading again, he should be begging, not whining about 'yankee aggression.'

PUH-leeeeeez!

------------------
"The lies I told are not falsehoods according to my definition of truth." Bill Clinton
"All stupid people are liberals, because they don't know any better." Rob Rodehorst
"Don't underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" - Dilbert, Scott Adams

 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
Oh brother. "Human rights." The very term is subjective and I hardly think the Western world is in much of a position to lecture others about human rights. History is definitely not our ally.

On the bright side, I can neatly side-step this question because Canada has no trade embargo with Cuba
:P

------------------
Stealing from one author is called plagarism.
Stealing from many is called research.

[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 16, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
I have no problem trading with socialist countries, but ones who have commited attrocities like Cuba's and China's should be cut off from the rest of the world until they decide to join civilization.

------------------
"To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)

 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
What "atrocities" can the Cubans do? Oh, SURE, they had that whole Angola thing back in the 70s, but Fidel's mellowed out in his old age. Go back & read the Playboy interview with him from August 1985--way cool. My kinda cat.

------------------
"Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
"...join civilization"?
Funny, thats what China thought of Africa and the rest of the world back in "the day". After visiting Africa, Australia, and N. America they concluded that the rest of the world was barbarous, greedy, and predatory, preferring to stay home in "civilization" and wait for the rest of the world to catch up.

Its a ironic pity that they were right and that they ultimately fell to greedy venture capitalists.
Furthermore, its ironic that many in the United States would prefer isolationism, just what China preferred.

Maybe history does repeat itself afterall.

------------------
Stealing from one author is called plagarism.
Stealing from many is called research.

[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 16, 2000).]
 


Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
 
Shik: When Cuban MiG's shoot civilian planes out of the sky because they were distributing leaflets talking about democracy. That's why. There are possibly many more reasons other than this, but that's the only thing I know about at this moment.

Now, for your comments, Dee.

1) Well, Castro has successfully brainwashed the Cubans into believing that America is at fault for their society's problems. Same way in which Iraq and Libya have convinced their people that America is the "Great Satan" and should be nuked off the face of the planet.

2) Two Words: We shouldn't.
Okay, another few words. An editorial cartoon a few years back had Canada's Mascot (the Beaver) holding up signs about Democracy in Haiti. The Caption said "Standing Up for Human Rights". The next panel had the same beaver sitting down with a newspaper bearing the headlines "Canada sells Nuclear Reactors to China". The Caption said "Sitting Down for Human Rights".

3) What resources?

4) Of course. Cuba would always remain a third world country, would it?

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Bah. Invasion of airspace. Plus littering. Punishable by death or extreme spanking in my book.

------------------
"Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
If we're the "Great Satan", who's the "Lesser Satan"? :-)

------------------
"I just measured him. He's about 21"."
-Chris Martin, 14-Jul-2000
 


Posted by D. Lerious on :
 
"3) What resources?"

One word: tourism. Cuba has some of the nicest beaches, and it used to be the premier site for American tourist during the pre-Castro days.

------------------
When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.


 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
I can think of no better way to open a society than to encourage the development of economic ties with them. Conversely, I can think of no better way to create a dangerously violent enemy than to ignore and isolate them.

Tyrants want their people to be cut off from the outside world, from dangerous notions of freedom and the free exchange of ideas. It hardly seems like a wise policy to help such leaders achieve this goal.

------------------
But the dead only quickly decay. They don't go about being born and reborn and rising and falling like souffle. The dead only quickly decay.
--
Gothic Archies
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! For the love of God, Montressor!

 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

Didn't the Brits "open" China by going in and taking over places like Hong Kong and Shanghai? Didn't the Americans "open" Japan by sending Perry's fleet to whoop some butt?

When can we open Havana?

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi



 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
Hmmmm, on the other hand.
Japan reacted to its "opening" by attempting to emulate Western culture. However, intense racism against them essentially meant that they decided to strike out on their own, taking on the Russians in Manchuria, the Chinese, and eventually World War 2 in the Pacific.

The "opening" of China weakened the contemporary monarchy, eventually throwing the nation into chaos, and further meddling by other powers lead to the eventual import and success of communism.

side-fact: Interesting etymology of Hong Kong, essentially meaning "fragrant harbour" due to the import of British drugs relating to the Opium war.

Good job world. This isn't as straightforward as we'd like it.

.....course the Bay of Pigs could be considered a failed "opening".

------------------
Stealing from one author is called plagarism.
Stealing from many is called research.

[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 17, 2000).]
 


Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :
 
Hahahah. If racism against Japan lead to WWII, then slavery started the American Civil War.

It was Japan's intense racism for everyone else that lead to war.

After Japan's 'opening,' many of their thinkers went to work on how to deal with the western world. They knew about China, which lead to their isolationism. When they were forced to interact with the Western world, they decided that the West was a bunch of barbarians who happened to have better weapons. To avoid being conquered, they sent out many of their people to learn western ways and ideas, and to bring back that knowledge. Then, the Japanese would use the technology to turn around and defeat the Western barbarians.

This theme is present in many of their pre-war works, as well as during the Meiji Restoration. I can get specific quotes if you like, but it'll take a bit of digging through my college stuff.

------------------
"The lies I told are not falsehoods according to my definition of truth." Bill Clinton
"All stupid people are liberals, because they don't know any better." Rob Rodehorst
"Don't underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" - Dilbert, Scott Adams

 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
I could go dig up research as well, but I'm way too tired. Suffice it to say, I think you're mixing up cause and effect. The Japanese became racist against the West because the West was racist towards them. The rest of what you say is perfectly valid.

I suppose you believe Hollywood propaganda that the Indians were the aggressers against the United States and Europeans in North America as well right?

------------------
1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very
annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost

[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 17, 2000).]
 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Mucus:

When your government slaughters a couple thousand peaceful demonstrators, I'd call them uncivilized, wouldn't you?

As for Cuba, look http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/12/233056 and http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/14/172814 . That should tell you what you need to know.

------------------
"To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)

 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
And yet ironically characters in their cartoons have features that Japanese people don't have. Like ginger hair.

And blue hair.

------------------
"I can't believe we're actually gonna meet Guru Lou. Everyone says he's the wisest man in the universe. He's sensitive, creative, has a great sense of humour, and he's a really smooth dancer. *giggles*"
"You're confused Polly. We're not meeting Paul Newman."
- Polly & Speedy; Samurai Pizza Cats
 


Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
Don't be fooled for a second, Liam. Everything in anime is symbolism, right down to the hair color.

------------------
"Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Yeah. I saw a video that tried to explain that, a while back. I'll have to re-watch it and let you know.

My "History of East Asia" college course taught that each (Japanese and Chinese) culture thought itself superior to all others, (as did white western culture), and that bits of that feeling persist to this day (as it does in places in white cultures). This led to conflict, but was not in and of itself a primary cause. However, it was partly Japan's version of "Manifest Destiny" that led them to seek control of the Pacific Rim.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi



 


Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
 
quote:

Hahahah. If racism against Japan lead to WWII, then slavery started the American Civil War.

Hate to tell you this Jeff, but slavery did cause the Civil War. The "right" the states rights people were fighting for was slavery.

------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf


 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
The US civil war was fought more for political and economical reasons than for human rights...

------------------
"I just measured him. He's about 21"."
-Chris Martin, 14-Jul-2000
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Yes, but both the political and economical reasons had a lot to do with slavery. The South's economy was dependent upon slavery, and they didn't want to give that up. The Politics of State's Rights vs. Federal control was also at issue, regarding whether the federal government could set limits on, or abolish, slavery.

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi



 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
*shrug*
Omega: name a country in this world which hasn't "murdered" peaceful protestors. Morality is merely a matter of perspective.

Lesse, the Roman empire slaughtered christians, American's slaughtered Indians, same with Canada to a lesser degree, Spain had its Great Inqusition, China had Tianammen Square, England had *deep breath* Scotland, Ireland, various Protestant vs. Catholic clashes....need I go on?

By your definition, there isn't a single civilization in the world. Except maybe the really small ones in the Pacific rim

------------------
1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very
annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost

[This message has been edited by Mucus (edited July 18, 2000).]
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
Whasamatter, you don't grok the difference between "history" and "current events?"

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi



 


Posted by Curry Monster (Member # 12) on :
 
Lets just review a few facts.

In the first half of the century the Cuban economy was pretty much controlled by the USA. The money & wealth generated went back to the USA. The Cubans, being a tad peeved by this, had a revolution. Castro booted out US companies. This peeved the USA off. And they went about systematically destroying Cubas reputation for the next 40 odd years.
----
Some interesting things the CIA did to try and stop Castro:

When Castro came to the USA the US President refused to meet him.

The CIA systematically torched Cuban factories and farms. One document method was to cover a cat in petrol, light it, and then run it through a field of grain. Thus burning the crop. Lovely.

The CIA also tried to have Castro assasinated, and attempted poison. Look up operation mongoose, all ye chest thumping yankees. Also, pick up a book by Noam Chompsky. The guy is utterly brilliant. It'll be a real educational experience.
----
When the Cubans attempted to gain nuclear weapons as a deterrent to US aggression, you chaps went mental. Typical. Nobody DARE defend themselves. Those bastards!

Now, after all this, the USA implemeted the Helms-Burton law. Stating the no company that traded in Cuba could trade in the USA. A brilliant plan. No doubt. The USA could then claim that they were not blocking trade with Cuba. And thus blame any economic problems the Cubans had on Castro. The reality is quite different. (Just in case you didn't get the hint *L*).

The Helms-Burton law DOES effectively stop other nations dealing with Cuba by using the simplest economic rule. Risk v. Return. If a company trades with the Cubans, they are exiled from the 270 million strong US market. The number 1 market in the world. Who in their right mind would choose to trade with a few million cubans, who have relatively little wealth? Nobody. Thus effectively stopping international trade with Cuba. Excellent, well done. Well done, Senator Jessie 'the bastard'(as we affectionately call him) Helms. So what is this about? It's about money. As it always was with the USA. If you can't have it, nobody can.

A small nation dared to stand up for itself, and what an example the mighty made of it. Be proud, very proud, of what you have achieved.

When attacking Cuba, people will cry: 'But look, Castro's a DEMON' and 'they sponsor terrorism'. Lets see. In the last decade, over 1 million children under the age of 5 have died in Iraq, due to American sanctions. God, George Must be proud. Look what daddy did. The USA sponsors far more political campaigns than any other nation. Hell, in 1975 they even had the Aussie PM removed. And lets not forget, with such reliable sources as CNN and the NY times reporting on Castro, everything they say must be true. Afterall, its not like the NY Times is owned by the largest supplier of weapons to the US govt or anything.

A couple of other 'minor' points, the sanctions are illegal as they have not been written and ratified by the UN. But hey, why would you care about that?

Does the US govt know why other nations such as China and India are reluctant to fully open themselves (and their gigantic markets) to you? Because, quite frankly, you can't be trusted. Cuba is a glaring example of this. If anyone dares to speak out, they're screwed. Just like Cuba.

Capitalism by nature is a predator. And the USA is the supreme capitalist. It's always about money, and thus power. That's the American way. The USA is at the top of the food chain. That's why the USA (5% of the worlds population), controls about 43% of the resources. (Yeah, obscene aint it!). So as you can see, this system of resource allocation isn't a merticoracy, its Darwinism at its peak.

So why can't you let the Cubans have their country back and live in peace? It's kinda hurtful to the ego maybe? Yeah...can't leave a little nation alone, to fend for themsevles. Nope. As one American politician stated 'Just give me the signal, and I'll turn that little island into a fucking parking lot'. Beautiful. It you can't have it, crush it.

The American way.

Get the hell off their island.

------------------
"More beer, more beer, more beer, more beer! ARSE!"
- Ode to God.

[This message has been edited by Daryus Aden (edited July 19, 2000).]
 


Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
 
1stof2 said:
quote:

Yes, but both the political and economical reasons had a lot to do with slavery. The South's economy was dependent upon slavery, and they didn't want to give that up. The Politics of State's Rights vs. Federal control was also at issue, regarding whether the federal government could set limits on, or abolish, slavery.

Glad there is someone else around who sees this. We had this out at the BBS, back around flag day. I could have used you there First. You are far better at argueing then I am.

------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf


 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Mucus:

OK, ours. There's a big difference between a soldier getting jumpy or getting rocks thrown at him or whatever and opening fire, and soldiers actually having ORDERS to kill the protesters. Oh, and morality is not relative.

------------------
"To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)

 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
Omega:

relative
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century
: not absolute or independent

Main Entry: ab�so�lute
Function: adjective
Date: 14th century
: having no restriction, exception, or qualification,
independent of arbitrary standards of measurement

Great, Einstein raised doubt whether or not most of our basic measurements of time and space are relative and you're trying to say a human abstraction like morality is absolute?

Gee, is it moral to kill? The United States say yes (capital punishment), other nations say no (Canada). Is abortion moral? Don't even have to bother explaining that one. Is it moral to for a millionaire to steal bread? Is it moral for a starving child to steal food?

How the hell can you say that Western morals are absolute with no element of relativity?

On a more superficical level, I said its a matter of perspective.

For your second part. How the f*** can you be so egocentric (culture-centric?) to even start to believe that North America is the only "civilization" in the world. You're wrong with the superficial definition of the word. You're wrong with the connotations of that word.
And you're trying to say your standard of morality is the only applicable one in the whole world? Can you be any more arrogant?

Third part: Oh thats right. The Western world has never issued orders to kill civilians. Hiroshima, various sites of the Holocaust, Germans bombing London, Americans killing civilians in Vietnam. They all never existed.

Oh, wanna get more specific? Countries in the Western world have never killed their own citizens. Capital punishment, various flavours of eugenics, the Great Inqusition, Waco Texas, they all never existed.

I'm not saying that the rest of the world is perfect. In fact, far from it. Just don't be so arrogant to assume your little slice of the world is perfect and judge the rest of the world accordingly.


First of Two: The difference between history and current events is relative. See above elaboration.

------------------
1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very
annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost
 


Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
 
>"The difference between history and current events is relative."

Yeah, that's what they said in Kosovo.

You either learn from history, or you keep repeating the same old stupidity, and your hostility lasts for decades or centuries.

If you learn from history, you're obliged to help others avoid the same stumbles you made. Isn't that what parents are for?

------------------
"Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi



 


Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
 
What are you arguing?
You can learn from both "current events" or "history". Which one you label it is irrelevant to learning.

I'm just saying the dividing line is relative, aka. is the line one millenia ago? one century ago? one month ago? one day ago? one second ago?

------------------
1957: The space age begins when the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, is placed in orbit by the Soviet Union on October 4. Our German rocket scientists get very
annoyed with their German rocket scientists. � Outpost
 


Posted by Diane (Member # 53) on :
 
Mucus: I think Omega was talking about morality in the Bible-thumping perspective, in which case it is supposedly not relative but I don't know anyone who acts like that in reality. Er, that is, the reality of corporeal life, since reality is also relative.

------------------
"One more day before the storm
At the barricades of freedom!
When our ranks begin to form
Will you take your place with me?"
--Enjolras, "One Day More," Les Miserables


 


Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
 
Mucus:

"Great, Einstein raised doubt whether or not most of our basic measurements of time and space are relative and you're trying to say a human abstraction like morality is absolute?"

Abstract concepts created by humanity (assuming you don't believe in God) are certainly absolute. Look at mathematics. We defined it, so we make the rules. Pure science is a completely different animal, as we're analyzing something that already exists, and trying to deduce the existing rules. Just because we don't all agree on an absolute moral standard doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

"How the f*** can you be so egocentric (culture-centric?) to even start to believe that North America is the only "civilization" in the world."

I don't believe I ever said that we were.

"And you're trying to say your standard of morality is the only applicable one in the whole world? Can you be any more arrogant?"

Oh, yes, my belief that I'm right is such a terrible thing. Can't think that anyone's wrong, can we?

*sarcasm dripping off the walls*

------------------
"To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)

 


Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
 
<interruption>If I may make a quick correction to post a ways back, I'd like to point out that Canada didn't ever, to my knowlege, use force against its Native peoples. Of course, it could be said that the one-sided imposed land treaties and their consequences were equally abusive as far as human rights were concerned, but the mounties did successfully prevent Cowboys 'n Injuns style violence north of the 49th Parallel. The Metis were of course, a different story.</interruption>
We now return to your regularly-scheduled discussion.

------------------
"Truth about Santa Claus debunks Santa God. God evolves from Santa."
-Gene Ray, http://www.timecube.com


[This message has been edited by The_Tom (edited July 20, 2000).]
 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Whoops! Off to the flameboard, kiddies.

------------------
I am not good with English but excuses me. I hate you whom think bad of the gods of the thunder known under the name of ""Metallica"". Good tape of ""Metallica"" is ""Load"", that you like it or not. A much better tape of Metallica ""Load"" than overrated the tape known under the name of ""Iron Maiden"" ""Powerslave"". You all are penis for the bad one of thought about ""Lars"". ""Lars"" can take a cucumber in bottom of his throat without reflex of muzzle. Lars can too take cucumber in bottom with no stretching of bottom hole sphincter muscle. Thanks for reading.
--
an anonymous fan
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Because I'm saving all my love for you.


 




© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3