Why isn’t that the role of the US government?
I have lots of ideas about the proper role of government, too, but somehow you get to tell me what the proper roles actually are and I don’t get to tell you?
How did you achieve this position of superiority?
Because we’d be forced to embargo every fucking island nation where a US citizen ever got drunk and bought a time share.
I came by it honestly. How do you achieve yours?
JUDGE: When did this crime occur?
DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Fifty years ago.
JUDGE: The statute of limitations passed long ago. Case dismissed!
My point – if you want to consider this theft as a mugging, you need to consider that 50 years is way too long to try to continue the comparison.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Excuse me, Your Honor, but I’d remind the court that our mugger here is on trial for possession of stolen property, which is a continuing offense. While the crime of theft happened fifty years ago, and would indeed be covered by the statute of limitations, the crime of possession of stolen property continues each day the accused remains in possession of the property in question, so there is no statute of limitations issue here. (pause) He’s got the wallet he stole in his pocket right now.
Judge: I suggest the DA re-watch the movie, Frozen. There’s a song that is applicable here. 
Bricker still not actually stating how continuing the embargo helps anyone, nor is he answering my question about how long he’d oppose any rapproachement even if the embargo doesn’t force any changes. When is it okay to try a new strategy considering the decades and decades of failure for the old one?
Cuba’s a bit of a fixer-upper?
I have answered the “how it helps” question several times by pointing out that since Obama’s policy doesn’t help either, this is not a question I need to defend. It’s as though you asked how the Trump Cuba policy reversal will help the problem of Hollywood gender pay gaps. It doesn’t, but since nothing to do with Cuba does, that’s not a motivating factor for me.
Now, how long would I oppose rapprochement? At a minimum, when the Cuban people stop having a leader named “Castro.”
Why don’t you believe there’s any chance that Obama’s policy would help Cubans? Engagement has helped the people of China and Vietnam; why are you so certain it wouldn’t help the Cuban people?
“…since Obama’s policy doesn’t help either”, is a statement of fact or opinion?
If it’s a statement of fact, then a cite is all the defense necessary because someone else will have done the work for you.
If it’s an opinion, then I guess you can just let it stand on its own merits.
I draw my primary information from the Cubans who are neighbors of my in-laws in Santo Domingo and are in contact with their families in Camagüey and Bayamo. Their general experience is that the Cuban leadership enjoyed the influx of dollars but very little change was seen on the part of Cubans that are NOT part of the ruling elite.
Since I can’t cite that and it’s more anecdote, anyway, I’ll happily call this my opinion.
I don’t say it could never help, but based on what’s reported to me from people with families outside Havana and not associated with the ruling elite: it has not.
And this is like asking the judge in the mugger case how his prison sentence helps the mugger. The answer is that prison serves a punitive goal: it’s punishment.
So the embargo gets 50+ years to try and make a difference but Obama’s initiative gets less than 2. My word, what a reasonable position to take.
You think it’s reasonable to make a conclusion about Obama’s policy after such a short period of time? That strikes me as ridiculous.
I don’t think you’re looking at this objectively, or at least you’re not putting effort into the topic. Your analysis so far, IMO, is leagues below your normally high standards.
By the way, your punishment analogy fails when the ones being punished are the Cuban people, who haven’t done anything wrong.
Why would I possibly be obligated to give Obama’s policy some sort of extended tryout? I don’t like it. I thought Obama was unwise to implement it. I’m happy Trump rolled it back, and I haven’t been happy about too much Trump has done. What possible reason is there for me to say, “Yes, Obama’s policy should continue to see if it makes the Cubans return our property?”
The Cuban government stole property. I don’t know of any way to separate the government from the people without armed force.
I grant you that my analysis is not objective. But I don’t see how it’s wrong.
If your sole goal is punishing, then sure you have no reason to give a shit which policy is more effective for making a positive change in Cuba. Just don’t shovel crap about how neither policy makes a difference because your neighbour’s cousin hasn’t reported back with delight less than 2 years after a policy change. Most American states and businesses haven’t even finished negotiating deals under the new regime yet.
Carnal K:
Why should the evaluation of the accusation only begin after Obama lifted the embargo? Cuba had many other countries that were willing to do business with them other than the USA. If that foreign money was staying with the elites rather than filtering down to making peoples’ lives better, then why should that same trend continuing in two years of American non-embargo need more time to evaluate?
Well to address that argument I would have to ask why you think European and Canadian investment hasn’t helped the Cuban people. Sure, the commies haven’t been overthrown but you are confident that everything would be just as bad without tourism and foreign trade? The school teacher who got money from my cab ride would likely beg to differ.