# What If We Had Befriended Cuba? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 25, 2009, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269 "2009-07-25T23:53:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/41 "2009-07-30T02:15:02Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > What do you think they use to buy stuff from Canada, if it isn’t hard currency? Why, a still **harder** currency – to wit, [_jineterismo!_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jineterismo)😃 ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/42 "2009-07-30T02:54:51Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No, that would not account for the U.S. being Cuba’s 5th-largest trading partner. So how does it work? Thanks for asking.😉 For example, in 2008, [we exported](http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2390.html) over $700m in goods to Cuba and imported $0 from. We may be Cuba’s fifth largest trading ? but it ain’t partner. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/43 "2009-07-30T03:18:16Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > IOW, Che was simply asking JFK to gracefully accept a not unjust _status quo_ that he had already tried and embarrassingly failed to overturn. Quite a reasonable offer under the circumstances. Che’s offer was to have the US accept a one party socialist government friendly (but not formally allied) to the Soviet Union for some amount of cash. It is a ludicrous offer. I suspect it was made disingenuously. Did Che really think that Kennedy would go on TV and say, “We might not like Cuba a whole lot, but since we’re getting some money, we’re not going to make a big deal out of our communist neighbor to the south?” Does anyone think that Kennedy, Johnson, or anyone else could have made that case to the American people? For the US to turn its back on the containment doctrine at that point in time, simply for the money? Get real! The offer not to formalize an alliance with the Soviet Union, but to continue to have a friendly relationship with them, was giving up NOTHING on the part of the Cuban government. AFAIK, Cuba may have signed a treaty of friendship with the USSR, as the Soviets signed with pretty much every anti-American country on the planet, but I’m not aware of any formal treaty alliance structure with the Soviets even after the rejection of this offer. Cuba was only making a concession of cash. Che didn’t say that Cuba would reject Soviet military aid. That would have been a substantial concession. He didn’t say that Castro would stop efforts to promote revolution in other countries, only that it might be raised as a point of discussion later. He didn’t say that any issue relating to human rights would be seriously addressed. Che was giving up nothing at all, and asking a lot of the Kennedy government. Again, I said that I don’t think our Cuba policy has worked at all. But to call this a serious offer in which both sides give up something important to them for the greater good is nonsense. It is often stated that diplomatic exchanges are the nicest possible way to tell someone else to go f\*\*\* themselves, and that is what Che was doing. It is worth noting that the left-wing website that the memo is printed on portrays the conversation as evidence of a brave Cuban policy to protect its revolution against imperialist aggression, as opposed to an attempt to compromise with a superpower in the name of peace. Again, Che was basically asking in the nicest way for the US to give Cuba everything it wanted, and for Cuba only to give up some lucre to the filthy capitalists. There are really only two ways I can read the offer: either a generously worded offer to the US to surrender its policy for essentially nothing in return; or an expression of a massive Marxist delusion that all the stupid capitalists would give up everything so long as some money made its way into the pockets of the American ruling class. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/44 "2009-07-30T04:02:44Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Che’s offer was to have the US accept a one party socialist government friendly (but not formally allied) to the Soviet Union for some amount of cash. > > … > > Cuba was only making a concession of cash. > > … > > Again, Che was basically asking in the nicest way for the US to give Cuba everything it wanted, and for Cuba only to give up some lucre to the filthy capitalists. WTF did you get the above from this? > [@](#): > > He then said that they didn’t want an understanding with the U.S. because they know that was impossible. They would like a Modus vivendi–at least an interim modus vivendi. Of course, he said, it was very difficult to put forth a practical formula for such a modus vivendi–he knew because he spent a lot of time thinking about it. He thought we should put forth such a formula because we had public opinion to worry about whereas he could accept anything without worrying about public opinion. > > I said nothing, and he waited and then said that, in any event, there were some things he had in mind. > > 1. That they could not give back the expropriated properties–the factories and banks–but they could pay for them in trade.3 > > 2. They could agree not to make any political alliance in the East–although this would not affect their natural sympathies. > > 3. They would have free elections–but only after a period of institutionalizing the revolution had been completed. In response to my question he said that this included the establishment of a one-party system. > > 4. Of course, they would not attack Guantanamo.4 (At this point he laughed as if at the absurdly self-evident nature of such a statement.) > > 5. He indicated, very obliquely, and with evident reluctance because of the company in which we were talking, that they could also discuss activities of the Cuban revolution in other countries. > > He then went on to say that he wanted to thank us very much for the invasion–that it had been a great political victory for them–enabled them to consolidate–and transformed them from an aggrieved little country to an equal. > > Guevara said he knew it was difficult to discuss/negotiate these things but we could open up some of these issues by beginning to discuss subordinate issues. He suggested discussion of the airplane issue. (presumably, we would use the airplane issue as a cover for more serious conversation.) > > He said they could discuss no formula that would mean giving up the type of society to which they were dedicated. > > At close he said that he would tell no one of the substance of these conversation except Fidel. I said I would not publicize it either. This not an ultimatum that Che drew up and was throwing in JFK’s face. It’s an informal conversation about suggested talking points. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/45 "2009-07-30T04:45:43Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > WTF did you get the above from this? From the memo. Money was the only meaningful concession that was offered. The others were meaningless. What kind of concession is not attacking Guantanamo? What kind of concession is not formalizing an alliance with the Soviets, knowing that the Soviets had been supplying arms and economic aid to Cuba for a year previous to this conversation? What kind of concession is it to promise to hold an election after a one-party state is established? What kind of concession is it to only raise the issue of talks later on Cuba exporting revolution? Look, I’m not a hard-liner, Cuba is the root of all commie evil kind of guy. I’m just looking at this as a negotiation. Che essentially asked for an agreement that the US would not invade or harass Cuba any further. Considering US policy at the time, that would be a very substantive reversal of US policy. In general, in negotiations, if you want the other side to back way, way down from its position, one should at least bring something similarly big to the table for the discussions to proceed in good faith. Che brought nothing to the table. It’s like me offering to buy your house for $100, and then expecting you to take my offer seriously in order to continue negotiations. > [@](#): > > This not an ultimatum that Che drew up and was throwing in JFK’s face. It’s an informal conversation about suggested talking points. :smack: Oh, please. This was not an informal conversation. It’s clear from the memo that the meeting was arranged, that Che did not make any distinction that he wasn’t speaking for the Cuban government, and that his offer was well organized and premeditated. And I don’t mean this as a slight, but if you think that an “informal conversation” involves Che only telling Castro of the conversation, and the American interlocutor with links to the White House passing the message on to “interested officials” of the US government, then I just don’t think you are very familiar with diplomacy. And as far as throwing things in JFK’s face, thanking the Americans for the Bay of Pigs and how its failure helped the revolution is the diplomatic equivalent of giving someone a finger and pissing in his martini. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/46 "2009-07-30T04:59:54Z")
Please. Tell. Me. Where. Money. Is. Mentioned. Even once. Earlier in the conversation, Che had said that the lack of hard currency to use to import food was a major problem. Didn’t sound like he was throwing it around. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/47 "2009-07-30T05:51:16Z")
> [@](#): > > Oh, please. This was not an informal conversation. It’s clear from the memo that the meeting was arranged, that Che did not make any distinction that he wasn’t speaking for the Cuban government, and that his offer was well organized and premeditated. Che did seek Goodwin out and did have some things to say which he had thought about a lot. Sooo? > [@](#): > > And I don’t mean this as a slight, but if you think that an “informal conversation” involves Che only telling Castro of the conversation, and the American interlocutor with links to the White House passing the message on to “interested officials” of the US government, then I just don’t think you are very familiar with diplomacy. Seems like perfectly reasonable exchange to me. The memo was declassified in '93 and made public in 96, 35 years after the fact. Just a private conversation. > [@](#): > > And as far as throwing things in JFK’s face, thanking the Americans for the Bay of Pigs and how its failure helped the revolution is the diplomatic equivalent of giving someone a finger and pissing in his martini. > Reply With Quote Just the facts. Truth can be funny if you have a sense of humor. ---
**Author:** ![lalenin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@lalenin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalenin)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/48 "2009-07-30T14:02:58Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Please. Tell. Me. Where. Money. Is. Mentioned. Even once. Earlier in the conversation, Che had said that the lack of hard currency to use to import food was a major problem. Didn’t sound like he was throwing it around. This looks like an offer of money, or compensation at least: “1. That they could not give back the expropriated properties–the factories and banks– **but they could pay for them in trade**.” ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/49 "2009-07-30T14:19:30Z")
> [@](#): > > Quote: > Originally Posted by adhay > Please. Tell. Me. Where. Money. Is. Mentioned. Even once. Earlier in the conversation, Che had said that the lack of hard currency to use to import food was a major problem. Didn’t sound like he was throwing it around . > [@](#): > > This looks like an offer of money, or compensation at least: > > “1. That they could not give back the expropriated properties–the factories and banks–but they could pay for them in trade.” WTF? The following is a response to **lalenin** from the French Cuban “apologist”, Lamrani Salim. lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Eleccions - In the first place there is only one political party in cuba, > the Communist Party (PCC). That does not mean that Cubans are monolithic in > their political thinking, that means that other political parties are > illegal. In Cuban elections you get a ballot with a candidate's name, one > candidate per office, your choices are 'Si' or 'No'. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > The Communist Party does not have any electoral role. It can't designate candidates. There's a law that prohibits it. Candidates are designated by electors. There is not one candidate per office but at least two and you can have a maximum of eight candidates. There is absolutely not such thing as "yes" or "no". This type of question is only for referendums. > There is only one political party because the Cubans decided so in 1976 when they voted the new constitution. It doesn't mean that it's the perfect system but the Cubans chose it and you have to respect that. If you take a look at Cuban history you find out easily that it's impossible to impose something to the Cuban people. They do not accept tyranny and they fight againt it. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Freedom of movement - Cubans are not allowed to travel overseas without > permission from the Cuban government. That's not a passport, that's a whole > other thing. In order to travel overseas, unless you are sent by the Cuban > government, you need to be invited by some foreign entity. The Cuban > government evaluates 1. the foreign entity, and 2. the likelihood that you > will not return, and grants or denies an exit permit. Then you must apply > for a passport, in order to get a passport you must 1. have an exit permit, > 2. a paid airline ticket, and 3. a reasonable likelihood of of returning. > Then you must apply to the foreign government for a visa, since many Cubans > have a tendency to stay overseas that is not as easy as it sounds. Special > permission must be obtained to travel to Havana, and if you overstay your > time in Havana you get deported back to your town of origin. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > Everybody is allowed to travel. You only need a visa and money to pay your ticked and an invitation card which is a formality. The biggest obstacle for Cubans is first an economic one and also the problem of getting a visa. And it's not the Cuban government responsabily that is involved in the question of visas. > There are some restrictions for qualified people like doctors who want to travel abroad because they have the respond to national needs. It's the same in France for people you get special grants from the government for their studies. In Cuba, studies are free. it's very expensive to become a doctor and that why the Cuban government retain these people who have to serve the country for at least two years and then they can travel. > The problem of money is not only a Cuban problem. Less than 10% of world population travels. 7% of American people travel. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Freedom of speech - The easiest way to get in political trouble in Cuba is > when you are charged with 'desacato' or disrespect. There are several > levels of desacato, from 'Desacato Oficial' to 'Desacato a la Figura del > Comandante en Jefe', or Official Disrespect and Disrespect to the Figure of > the Commandant in Chief (Fidel, now Raul), both of these laws are used to > repress all criticism of the government. But the best of the bunch of > repressive Cuban laws is the crime of 'Peligrosidad Pre-delicitiva', or > 'Pre-crime dangerousness'. That's when no crime, not even desacato has been > committed, but someone feels that, perhaps, you are not revolutionary > enough, and might commit some couter-revolutionary act, you get 3-5 years > for that. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > You only have to read the foreign press like the Miami Herald or El Nuevo Herald to find the publications of the Cuban opposition who is very critical against the Cuban gov and nothing happens to her. The only thing prohibited in Cuba is to receive money from a foreign government. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Government - I have one name for you: Castro. 1959-2008 Fidel, > 2006-present Raul. That's not a democracy, that's a dynastic monarchy, no? > > ``` Sallim: > [@](#): > > ``` > These are decisions of the Cuban people and you have to accept that. I repeat again: Cubans are very courageous, they are not cowards. If they didn't want the Castros they would fight against them as they did against Spain, Machado, Batista etc... > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Race Relations - Take a look at Fidel and Raul, pretty white looking, > correct? The Cuban Council of Minitros has something like 30 ministries, 5 > are black. Cuba's population is 40% black. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > Cuba has no lessons to receive in this field. It's the country that has done the most for colored people. Which country has done a better job? Although it's not a perfect society, it is the least injsut. > > ``` Here let me add a quote from one of my previous posts. > [@](#): > > • The current Cuban Parliament (2006) is extremely representative. Of the 609 deputies > in the National Assembly: 219 are women (36%), 8% more than the previous > legislature. 33% are black (4% more than in the previous Assembly) and 25% are > manual workers in productive or service industries. Just like our own Congress. lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Gay Relations - Until the 1970's Cuba had a policy of sending gays to > detention camps, Unidades Militares para la Ayuda de Producción (UMAP), > these were re-education camps where gays were sent. UMAP camps were > championed by Guevara. > > ``` Sallim: > [@](#): > > ``` > False. The UMAP only lasted 18 months and they were for people who did not want to do the military service which is obligatory, among them gays, and they had to work in agriculture. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Several thousand gays were deported during the Mariel boatlift. Prior to > being picked up at their homes and sent in boats they were subjected to > Actos de Repudio, or Acts or Repudiation, where many where mobs > demonstrated in front of their houses and pelted them with rocks and > garbage. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > Completely false. Show the evidence! > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > During the AIDS crisis other concentrations camps were established where > all diagnosed with HIV were sent. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > Completely false! people with aid has the possibility to go to isolated structures to be taken care of. It was not an obligation. Many people chose to go because the conditions were excellent and they lived better there than in their home. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Education - From grade 6 children are sent to labor camps for 45 days > during the school year, the children live, work, and sleep in these camps. > Parents are allowed to visit one day every two weeks. In order to attend > university one must be a member of the Union the Jovenes Comunistas (UJC) > or Communist Youth. If one cannot demonstrate sufficient revolutionary > zeal, one is not allowed to join UJC, consequently no university. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > Completely false ! This person has never lived in Cuba! You even have deputies who don't belong to the CCP, almost half of them. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Work Relations - Only government run worker unions are allowed in Cuba. > The only problem with that is that the government is the only legal > employer, consequently unions in Cuba are useless. Most workers make $15-20 > a month. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > False, since the development of tourism, many Cubans work for themselves (taxis, restaurant, etc..) > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Blockade - Bullshit. There is no blockade in Cuba, there was one for about > two weeks in 1962, nothing since then. There is a trade embargo by the US, > but that also is bullshit. > The US is Cuba's 5th largest trading partner, behind Venezuela, China, > Spain and Canada, and the US is Cuba's largest supplier of food imports. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > That is so "bullshit" that 185 countries voted against it in 2008 for the 18th consecutive year. > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Although food in Cuba is rationed, it is not for all. If you have dollars, > through relatives abroad or contact with tourists, you can get anything you > want in Cuba, whether it comes from the US or not. Coca Cola? No problem. > BMW, sure. MS Office, of course. > > ``` Salim: > [@](#): > > ``` > That 's right > > ``` lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > Of course you might look at my list and say that there are many other > countries in the world that are just as bad. And I agree. But those > countries don't have people who defend their government's right to abuse > their people, much like you do here with Cuba. Those countries and those > governments are, rightly, condemned. > > ``` I’ll step in here for a moment. Well, condemning China and Saudi Arabia for their abuses doesn’t stop us from trading with them. lalenin: > [@](#): > > Cuba is not how it is because the US didn’t befriend it. Cuba had a > powerful enough friend in the USSR, and it was equally repressive then. > Cuba is how it is, a repressive dictatorship, because one man was allowed > to climb to power, and then remain in power, by any means possible. Even if > those means meant the ruin of the country. Yes, the USSR (which we left to Castro as the only alternative) was a perfect role model for democracy. lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > And if you want to compare Batista with the Castro brothers, keep in mind > Batista seized power in 1952, and was ousted in 1958, 6 years in power. The > Castro brothers have been in power for 51 years. You tell me which is > worse. > > ``` It’s even worse when you consider that Batista had our help including military aid. lalenin: > [@](#): > > ``` > I'll leave you with Fidel Castro's own words assessing like in Cuba before > his own, and Bastista's take over of power: > > "Let me tell you a story: Once upon a time there was a Republic. > > ``` > > … > > ``` > Poor country! One morning the citizens woke up dismayed; under the cover > of night, while the people slept, the ghosts of the past had conspired and > has seized the citizenry by its hands, its feet, and its neck. That grip, > those claws were familiar: those jaws, those death-dealing scythes, those > boots. No; it was no nightmare; it was a sad and terrible reality: a man > named Fulgencio Batista had just perpetrated the appalling crime that no > one had expected. " > > That's an excerpt from Fidel Castro's "History will Absolve Me" speech. > Downright counter-revolutionary, isn't it? Quote it in Cuba and it can get > you 5 years in prison. > > ``` Salim > [@](#): > > ``` > nonsense! Oswaldo Paya, dissident leader says openly that Cuba is a tyranny and he has not spent one minute in prison and STILL WORKS FOR A COMPANY THAT BELONGS TO THE STATE; > > ``` With all due respect, your turn, **lalenin** ---
**Author:** ![lalenin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@lalenin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalenin)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/50 "2009-07-30T14:34:42Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Salim > > With all due respect, your turn, **lalenin** With all due respect to you, who is Salim? Is he a poster here? I am not about to get into a telegraph discussion with him. Your entire post pretty much consists of 'No it isn’t". ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/51 "2009-07-30T14:54:28Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Che did seek Goodwin out and did have some things to say which he had thought about a lot. Sooo? You’re going to have to get your story straight. Either Che was making a serious offer at rapprochement, and his message was to be taken seriously; or Che was talking BS and there was no serious offer for a modus vivendi. In the OP, you imply that the US missed an opportunity that the Cuban leadership presented to normalize relations. That means it must have been a serious offer, no? > [@](#): > > ``` > Please. Tell. Me. Where. Money. Is. Mentioned. Even once. > > ``` Actually, you are right. I misread the part where Che offered to make restitution to the US for expropriated properties. Che offered to pay for it “through trade,” meaning that the US would have to drop the sugar embargo it had imposed earlier. So, in contrast to my earlier belief that the only thing Cuba was offering was money, it is in fact the case that Cuba was literally offering nothing to the US. > [@](#): > > Seems like perfectly reasonable exchange to me. The memo was declassified in '93 and made public in 96, 35 years after the fact. Just a private conversation. It wasn’t a private conversation. Che said he would talk to Castro about it, and Goodwin said he’d brief interested officials, which ended up being the President of the United States. Perhaps you cannot distinguish between “sensitive negotiations” and “shooting the bull at a cocktail party,” but something tells me that Goodwin wrote Secret memos to Kennedy relaying the knee-slapper about Harold MacMillan, a priest, and a rabbi? > [@](#): > > Just the facts. Truth can be funny if you have a sense of humor. Do you think Kennedy would laugh about it? Do you think Che would think Kennedy would laugh about it? Nonsense. The comments were designed to insult. Finally, in the OP, you said that Kennedy’s rejection of Che’s offer drove Cuba into the arms of the USSR. You seem to be denying that Cuba and the Soviets had established substantial economic, political, and military ties well before this conversation took place. It isn’t as though Cuba was a member of the Non Aligned Movement prior to the missile crisis, this particular offer, or the Bay of Pigs. It is my guess that you’re making a philosophical/political defense of Cuba, not an argument based on historical facts. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/52 "2009-07-30T14:56:13Z")
> [@Salim](#): > > If you take a look at Cuban history you find out easily that it’s impossible to impose something to the Cuban people. Eh? Both Spain and the U.S. managed it for a very long time. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/53 "2009-07-30T15:01:35Z")
> [@](#): > > Your entire post pretty much consists of 'No it isn’t". No it doesn’t. Anyway, offering to compensate US investors for nationalized assets thru trade is not bribing them with cash and it’s a lot more fair than than these investors actually deserved. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/54 "2009-07-30T15:09:46Z")
OK. OK. OK. Castro’s a shit, Cuba’s AFU pure and simple and I don’t know what WTF I’ve been talking about.:smack: But what if we _had_ befriended Cuba? ---
**Author:** ![lalenin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@lalenin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lalenin)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/55 "2009-07-30T15:19:41Z")
The hell with it, I don’t really want to work this morning anyway. Here’s my response to Profesor Salim. > [@](#): > > The Communist Party does not have any electoral role. It can’t designate candidates. There’s a law that prohibits it. Candidates are designated by electors. There is not one candidate per office but at least two and you can have a maximum of eight candidates. There is absolutely not such thing as “yes” or “no”. This type of question is only for referendums. > There is only one political party because the Cubans decided so in 1976 when they voted the new constitution. It doesn’t mean that it’s the perfect system but the Cubans chose it and you have to respect that. If you take a look at Cuban history you find out easily that it’s impossible to impose something to the Cuban people. They do not accept tyranny and they fight againt it. The communist party doesn’t have an electoral role? Really? So the head of the Cuban government, Raul Castro, is the second secretary of of PCC, and the former head of the Cuban government, Fidel, is the first secretary of the PCC, and the entire Council of Ministers also composes the hierarchy of the PCC, but the PCC has not role in the Cuban government? What an amazing coincidence! > [@](#): > > Everybody is allowed to travel. You only need a visa and money to pay your ticked and an invitation card which is a formality. The biggest obstacle for Cubans is first an economic one and also the problem of getting a visa. And it’s not the Cuban government responsabily that is involved in the question of visas. > There are some restrictions for qualified people like doctors who want to travel abroad because they have the respond to national needs. It’s the same in France for people you get special grants from the government for their studies. In Cuba, studies are free. it’s very expensive to become a doctor and that why the Cuban government retain these people who have to serve the country for at least two years and then they can travel. > The problem of money is not only a Cuban problem. Less than 10% of world population travels. 7% of American people travel. A formality? Really? Don’t take my word for it, let’s listen to what Raul Castro himself said last year, as stated in [this article](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/04/18/2008-04-18_raul_castro_loosens_travel_restrictions_.html). "Raul Castro plans to lift restrictions on foreign travel for Cubans, allowing them to leave the country without permission from the authorities, it was reported Friday. Residents will no longer need to obtain special permission to leave the island, or a legalized letter of invitation, the Spanish language newspaper El Pais said, citing sources close to the government. The changes could take effect in the coming days or weeks and are a further sign Raul, who became president in February, plans to lift many of the restrictions which defined his brother Fidel’s rule. Cubans have previously had to obtain a so-called “white card” to leave the island. The process can take months and there is no guarantee of success." By the way, the restrictions have not been lifted. > [@](#): > > You only have to read the foreign press like the Miami Herald or El Nuevo Herald to find the publications of the Cuban opposition who is very critical against the Cuban gov and nothing happens to her. The only thing prohibited in Cuba is to receive money from a foreign government. Don’t take my word for it take a look at what Human Rights Watch has to say about [desacato](http://www.cubaverdad.net/crime_of_disrespect.htm), or [peligrosidad](http://www.cubaverdad.net/crime_of_dangerousness.htm), or [asociacion ilicita](http://www.cubaverdad.net/crime_of_illicit_association.htm). > [@](#): > > These are decisions of the Cuban people and you have to accept that. I repeat again: Cubans are very courageous, they are not cowards. If they didn’t want the Castros they would fight against them as they did against Spain, Machado, Batista etc… Of course, an no one in Cuba has ever fought against the Castros, right? Oh wait yes they have, but then those are just counter-revolutionary worms, correct? > [@](#): > > Cuba has no lessons to receive in this field. It’s the country that has done the most for colored people. Which country has done a better job? Although it’s not a perfect society, it is the least injsut. No, none at all. Just a country run by whites for 50 years. Batista, by the way, was not white. > [@](#): > > False. The UMAP only lasted 18 months and they were for people who did not want to do the military service which is obligatory, among them gays, and they had to work in agriculture. Oh please, not even the Cuban government stands by that line anymore. From the wiki article [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production). “Beginning in November 1965, people already classified were summoned to the camps. They arrived by train, bus, truck and other police and military vehicles.[1] Social deviants such as homosexuals, vagrants, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other religious missionaries were imprisoned in these concentration camps, where they would be “reeducated”.[2] “ Camps of forced labour were instituted with all speed to “correct” such deviations … Verbal and physical mistreatment, shaved heads, work from dawn to dusk, hammocks, dirt floors, scarce food … The camps became increasingly crowded as the methods of arrest became more expedient …” "Fidel Castro’s violence against homosexuals reflected the idea of homosexuality as bourgeois decadence, and he denounced “maricones” (faggots) as “agents of imperialism”.[8] Castro explained his reasoning in a 1965 interview: “ [H]omosexuals should not be allowed in positions where they are able to exert influence upon young people. In the conditions under which we live, because of the problems which our country is facing, we must inculcate your youth with the spirit of discipline, of struggle, of work… [W]e would never come to believe that a homosexual could embody the conditions and requirements of conduct that would enable us to consider him a true Revolutionary, a true Communist militant. A deviation of that nature clashes with the concept we have of what a militant Communist must be." > [@](#): > > Completely false. Show the evidence! > [@](#): > > Completely false! people with aid has the possibility to go to isolated structures to be taken care of. It was not an obligation. Many people chose to go because the conditions were excellent and they lived better there than in their home. Wow, this profesor does not know how to use Google apparently. From [this article](http://www.pinktriangle.org.uk/glh/213/cuba.html): “Arenas eventually got out of Cuba in the 1980 Mariel Harbour exodus, when Castro decided to get rid of “antisocial” dissidents, criminals and homosexuals by allowing these “scum” to emigrate to the US.” “With the advent of AIDS, the Cuban authorities initially cracked down hard, quarantining everyone with HIV in special sanatoria. But, by the early 1990s, the authorities felt compelled to adopt a more liberal approach, abandoning their detention policy – partly because it was costing too much! More significantly, Cuban health officials realised that they had to show greater tolerance towards the homosexual community in order to win their trust, confidence and support for safer sex.” > [@](#): > > Completely false ! This person has never lived in Cuba! You even have deputies who don’t belong to the CCP, almost half of them. Really, almost half of the deputies don’t belong to the PCC? Does that mean the other half does? Is this the same PCC that plays no role in Cuba’s eleccions? And what does that have to do with the forced child labor I discussed in the quoted text? Don’t take my work for it, [here’s an article from Juventud Rebelde](http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2006-11-05/el-plan-la-escuela-al-campo-se-renueva-/), Cuba’s communist youth, UJC, newspaper discussing it. It seems certain one of us has never lived in Cuba. > [@](#): > > False, since the development of tourism, many Cubans work for themselves (taxis, restaurant, etc..) The profesor has a tendency to quote only selected passages. Even independent workers are member of the the CTC, Conferederacion de Trabajadores de Cuba, which is an organ of the PCC. The same PCC that has no role in Cuban eleccions. > [@](#): > > That is so “bullshit” that 185 countries voted against it in 2008 for the 18th consecutive year. Again with the selective quoting. 185 countries may vote, but the US is still Cuba’s largest importer of food, and Cuba’s 5th largest trading partner. So regardless of the vote the embargo seems to be mostly BS. > [@](#): > > I’ll step in here for a moment. Well, condemning China and Saudi Arabia for their abuses doesn’t stop us from trading with them. And of course, you have no problem with that, correct? > [@](#): > > Yes, the USSR (which we left to Castro as the only alternative) was a perfect role model for democracy. Are you suggesting that Castro became a dictator because the USSR made him do it? > [@](#): > > nonsense! Oswaldo Paya, dissident leader says openly that Cuba is a tyranny and he has not spent one minute in prison and STILL WORKS FOR A COMPANY THAT BELONGS TO THE STATE; What is nonsense? That dissent in Cuba is not punished? Profesor, you must send that urgent information to Amnesty International! [It seems they are misinformed!](http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/cuba-58-prisoners-conscience-must-be-released-20080218) ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/56 "2009-07-30T15:31:37Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Spare me friendship like this. What to compare that to (say) Guatemala in '59? Rural southern Mexico? All of Latin America (and most of Mississippi) sucked in '59. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/57 "2009-07-30T15:35:42Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > But what if we _had_ befriended Cuba? For one thing, I’m pretty sure Barry Goldwater would have won the 1964 election. I don’t think many Americans at the time who would be thrilled with a politician telling them, “Yeah, they are commies, and yeah, the Soviets have nuclear weapons there, but really, we ought to be friends!” ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/58 "2009-07-30T15:47:04Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > They pay for it thru trade. They may both pay cash but in the end, there’s no drain on either country’s currency reserves. That’s what balance of trade is all about. > > [Canada actually imports more from Cuba than it exports to Cuba](http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:km5PH-YT6XAJ:embacu.cubaminrex.cu/Portals/7/trade.doc+balance+of+trade+cuba+canada&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us). Do you even understand what you’re talking about? You think companies in Canada ship goods to Cuba, and are paid not in Candadian Dollars, but with sugar and cigars and prostitutes? That’s not how it works. If Cuba wants goods produced in Canada, they purchase those goods using Canadian Dollars. If they are low on Canadian Dollars, they trade Euros or Pounds or US Dollars for Canadian Dollars. Cuba gets hard currency like Euros or Canadian Dollars by selling goods and services in Europe, or to Europeans. So a European tourist comes to Cuba, spends Euros, and the Cuban government uses those Euros to import goods and services from Eurozone countries, or converts the Euros into other hard currencies. The fact that Canada imports more from Cuba than it exports shouldn’t be too surprising, since if the US imports essentially nothing from Cuba and Cuba imports a great deal from the US, there has to be some mechanism for them to do so. And that mechanism is, they take Canadian dollars they earned from Canadian tourism and exports to Canada, and purchase US dollars, and use those US dollars to purchase US goods. Wow, Cuba now imports from the US but exports nothing! What a ripoff! Except, you know, that it isn’t. Because the guys who bought Canadian dollars from Cuba and gave them US dollars will now use those Canadian dollars to purchase Canadian goods/services. You see how that works? A trade imbalance between two countries means nothing. A country that has a net trade imbalance is doing something unsustainable, because currency is flowing in/out of the country and goods and services are flowing out/in, and someday the people holding the currency will want goods and services in return. If the currency isn’t worth anything anymore, then they sold their goods and services for a pittance. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/59 "2009-07-30T15:56:16Z")
What if we had befriended Cuba? > [@](#): > > For one thing, I’m pretty sure Barry Goldwater would have won the 1964 election. That’s what I was looking for. Ok. Everybody back to work. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269/60 "2009-07-30T16:09:17Z")
Whoo-hoo! I win! In your face, Salim, and anyone else not on this message board participating the the discussion by third parties or Ouija board! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-had-befriended-cuba/504269.md?page=4)