All right, this has been done before, but I’d like to see if it will fly again. The last go-rounds contained no coherent arguments for sustaining the embargo. Can I now conclude that all intelligent, compassionate people want the embargo to be lifted? I’m ready to switch sides here; if anybody wants to sway the opinions of an unknown person on the Internet, here’s your big chance.
Now you’ve put us in a difficult position. Those of us who argue in favor of the embargo are unintelligent people with no compassion?
There’s no reason to lift the embargo. Cuba is run by a dictator who doesn’t recognize basic human rights such as free speech, religion, and the right of people to have a say in their government. The United States should not support such things.
Marc
I’m assuming that everybody on this board is both intelligent and compassionate.
True. How does sustaining the embargo help things there?
The USA trades with many other countries that are as bad, if not worse…take Saudi Arabia, for instance.
But then, we don’t have millions of bitter and politically influential former Saudi’s dictating our foreign policy.
As soon as Fidel is gone, things will change. The thing is, cripes, he’s the Energizer Bunny! I figure there are some policy makers and folks with influence who are upset about the missed opportunity in 1957-8, there are others who still think he’s a stinkin’ commie, and then there are some who feel the embargo will pressure the regime to be more democratic / concerned about human rights. Cuba’s economy would do nothing but grow if the embargo were lifted, and I’d bet Fidel would ease up on his Gaullist concept of governance.
No site, but just after looking at how the regime took power and how Castro holds power now, that’s my take. Jeez, even Mexico, member nation of NAFTA, was not a gleaming example of human rights in 1992 (that’s when NAFTA was effectualized, right? '92?). A couple of my English friends visited Cuba in January. Religion is not as suppressed as some make it sound. Many missionaries from the US are there right now, not exactly as fugitives either.
**
Except for people who support the embargo against Cuba.
Well it has prevented Castro from gaining to much power. You don’t see Cuba having a huge influence in the area do you?
Marc
**
Doesn’t make it right.
Dictate? I must have missed the memo that said ex-Cubans have the power to dictate foreign policy to the United States government. Tell me, do the jews dictate US foreign policy as well? ;j
Marc
Trade does not equal support. China - plus several dozen other places, at least - answer this description. It’s really funny to see American visitors freak out over Havana cigars when they’re overseas. Yes, they’re on sale everywhere but the land of the free.
The embargo on Cuba is pathetic - just to win some votes in Miami. If you can trade with and invest in Vietnam in 2002, why not Cuba?
Funny thing is, the embargo has kept Castro in power. He’s the biggest fan of it.
**
Trade does equal support. If there’s not much money coming into Cuba then the government will have fewer funds.
**
So the rest of the word trades with Cuba? So why exactly is the United States embargo harming Cuba if this is the case?
Marc
What and admit that we as a nation have been useing the country as a scapegoat. As for the cuban vote in miami, who cares. They chose to run and hope someone else would fight their battles so they could return in triumph. We have absolutely no business in the embargo business anyway. The way we do things within our own borders precludes any right to tell others how to do things.
Your idea would be a tacit admission of legitemacy for Cuba’s government. And that cannot happen until Castro is out of power, and the country eased toward capitalism and democracy.
It has done nothing of the sort. Cuba never “gained too much power” even with the full support of the U.S.S.R. (which full support ended over 25 years ago).
The only thing that our current situation does is placate a bunch of exiles who use their money and leverage with the Far Right to dictate our foreign policy. (We could and should ignore them, but no President has the guts to try it.)
With China we use the argument that trade will “open up” the country. Then the Castro haters claim that trade would not “open up” Cuba. The real reason we haven’t tried to “open up” Cuba is that they do not have a large enough market to get the business community to oppose the exiles.
Meanwhile, the Helms-Burton idiocy causes us grief among all our allies as we dodge around harrassing them while attempting to not enforce its provisions–which would ignite a major trade war.
We should simply drop the farce. Castro has not susccessfully exported revolution in over 30 years and has not even attempted it in over 20.
I hate to reduce Foriegn Policy to a homily, but in this case it seems appropriate:
You catch more flys with honey than with vinegar.
Economic influence is more likely t change Cuba than anything short of an out-right invasion. Byembargoing Cuba, all we’ve done is to completely remove our influence from Cuba. Cuba acn do pretty much what it wants (within broad limits), without having to worry about the American reaction, because there’s nothing more we can do to them!
Reestablish trade, help raise their standard of living, help rebuild their infrastructure. The Cuban form of communism is nothing more than a cult of personality, and when Castro dies, a prosperous Cuba is far less likely to fall into chaos.
Castro is not important–except for the fact that our hostility towards him makes him important.
He’s just another chump generalissimo with an ego 3 sizes too big for his hat.
Drop the embargo. Then snub him. In six months his “importance” will vanish, & he will become a minor joke.
Without the USSR, Castro-Boy is Castrato-Boy, & his importance very quickly becomes impotence .
Leave things as they are, & folks in the Mid-East will start striking up alliances with the hairy jerk.
Yes you should. Castro can not give the Cubans what they need. And he blames you. If the embargo is lifted the only responsable will be him.
Besides it creates “clashes” with your allies. Take the case of Latin America, even though most of the countries in the region don’t like Castro himself Cuba is “our little sister” it causes resentment to see the way you have being treating them for the last 40 years. The cold war is over, you not only trade but negotiate (and negotiated" with dictators all over the world. Pakistan is the latest example.
Every year you vote, and force many, to vote against Cuba in Human Rights issue. It is true that you also question China but only to keep a coherent foreign policy, the pressuers you make in the first case are tremendous. With China there not.
The greatest potentiall problem to Castros’s regime would be the end of the embargo
Where were you during the Elian Gonzalez fiasco? That whole thing was one big “let’s kiss the ex-Cubans’ collective asses” contest (except for Janet Reno, how dare she try to reunite a child with his father!).
Why anyone in Washington should give two toots to the Cuban expatriates lounging around Florida is beyond me.