Good old Castro...

[aerocontrols]

Isn't this whole thing kind of silly?

Yes. Yes it is.

 

[Mike B.]

In response to the U.S. having hundreds of nukes on Turkish soil within a few miles of the U.S.S.R. But of course that's OK because they're "our" nukes.

At least show some consistency, it's either OK or not OK to put nukes adjacent to your cold war adversary via a 3rd party.

Of course the US should have welcomed missiles in Cuba because it is very important in conflict to be "consistent."

You know it was also very unfair for the allies in World War II to try to stop the Germans from getting the atomic bomb. I mean that was so "inconsistent." The US was working on one.

This is the kind of inane argument that some on this forum gave before the Iraq war. You know that it was "unfair" for the US/UK to use their technological advantage in war.

Of course the US should have crushed France when they left NATO the way the Soviets did to Hungary and Czechslovakia. After all that would have been "consistent."

 

[Jocko]

In response to the U.S. having hundreds of nukes on Turkish soil within a few miles of the U.S.S.R. But of course that's OK because they're "our" nukes.

At least show some consistency, it's either OK or not OK to put nukes adjacent to your cold war adversary via a 3rd party.

So because it's possible for you to rationalize the Cuban missile crisis, it follows that it's unreasonable to remember it? I wouldn't blame Russia if they still held a grudge against Turkey, either. That's their prerogative, as the embargo is ours.

 

[Jocko]

Isn't this whole thing kind of silly?...The US is NOT going to invade Cuba.

This is SOP for Castro, he has been warning of an immenent invasion of Cuba for 40 years now...

Ironically, it's also SOP for North Korea, usually right before the workers' paradise produces yet another remarkably poor harvest. The only difference I can see is that apparently fewer things float in North Korea. Cubans, on the other hand, could make a brick sh*thouse float if properly motivated.

 

[The Don]

Of course the US should have welcomed missiles in Cuba because it is very important in conflict to be "consistent."

Nope, but continuing to punish a country 40 years later for it is a little extreme. [sweeping generalisation] One of the problems I have with the U.S. is its unwillingness/inability to put itself in the other guy's shoes to understand their standpont. I believe it's one of the reason's it's so unpopular right now[/sweeping generalisation]

I was responding to Jocko's point about installing missiles. Cuba was just behaving likela loyal ally. Why continue to punish them 40 years later ?

 

[Jocko]

I was responding to Jocko's point about installing missiles. Cuba was just behaving likela loyal ally. Why continue to punish them 40 years later ?

Er, because it's the same guy running the show? Like I said, it's very personal and when he's gone you'll see a dramatic shift, I think.

I see no value in "putting myself in the shoes" of my enemy, beyond searching for new ways to destroy him. Maybe it's time Castro put himself into our shoes - you know, the country he pointed Russian nukes at? If there's any empathy forthcoming, I expect it to be northbound, sir.

 

[a_unique_person]

Your descriptions of history always crack me up, AUP.

???? All communist countries are not the same, just as all democracies or dictatorships are not. If we can say that, we can also say that there will be some worse than others. I can't understand what is wrong with saying that. Much of the USSR empire fell incredibly quickly. As soon as any hint of Russian support was withdrawn, the edifice fell.

It is possible that Cuba is another North Korea, but I don't think it is. There is not the massive starvation that North Korea has, for example. As the Bay of Bigs showed, the Cubans might just hate the landowners more than communism.

I am not trying to defend communism in Cuba, nor attack it. If it is reasonable humane, then it is best to just let the Cubans work it out for themselves. As Iraq has clearly demonstrated, blundering around the world like a bull in a china shop is not necessarily a better solution than letting the people of a country work out their issues for themselves.

 

[a_unique_person]

Er, because it's the same guy running the show? Like I said, it's very personal and when he's gone you'll see a dramatic shift, I think.

I see no value in "putting myself in the shoes" of my enemy, beyond searching for new ways to destroy him. Maybe it's time Castro put himself into our shoes - you know, the country he pointed Russian nukes at? If there's any empathy forthcoming, I expect it to be northbound, sir.

That's right, act like a child. I hate him, so I'll make him pay. Time to grow up.

 

[headscratcher4]

I know this is simplistic, but...

I believe Castro is in power today for one reason only (No, not Castro). Castro remains in power becasue of U.S. sanctions.

Castro manipulates those sanctions to shore up his regime with nationalist (contra-Marxist, one might add) images that are easilly understood by his people -- a people with a history of foriegn domination. Castro says the US will invade, people become Cuban nationalists to protect the homeland (not Castro).

However, were sanctions to be lifted, it would place Castro in a very awkward position. Indeed, Castro doesn't want sanctions lifted.

Lifting of sanctions, easier travel and trade between Cuba and the US, an flood of U.S. tourists, etc. would completely undermine the regime.

Castro could not control the flood of ideas. People working directly with tourists would expand greatly, creating a greater gulf between those rewarded by the State and the average person.

Cubans from Miami visiting home and spreading US dollars, skateboards, electroinic equipment, rap music, vidos -- all the perks of the degenerate capitalist culture --would undermine the regime. In addition, the police state that is Cuba would be increasingly under global public display.

In reality, Castro will likely die in power. Than a new revolution begins. Raul will not be able to hold it together for long (or live that much longer than his brother). The battle will than be between the Cuban technocrats brought up in Castro's system, relatively anti-US, but looking at China and other transitional "socialist" states and wanting to move Cuba forward and open it up, vs. the Miami Cubans who think they will waltz in, reclaim property and immediately get to run the country...


If the US can controll the Miami Cubans (if they can control themselves), once Castro is out of the picture, Cuba should be set to transition to a more open society...

The thing for US policy makers, IMO, is to ignore Castro (which the Miami Cubans won't allow politically). Castro is irrelevnet these days -- save for feeding/feeding off of growing global anti-Americanism. But generally, hemisphericaly, time has moved on...he will be an icon of the anti-Americans in Latin America for years to come, but the disintegration of his regime upon his demise will underscore how devestating that regime is/was to human rights, progress etc.

 

[Jocko]

That's right, act like a child. I hate him, so I'll make him pay. Time to grow up.

Your comments have been forwarded to the State Department for immediate review. You will be promptly informed if they decide to go with your course of action. Thank you for your contribution, fellow patriot!

 

[Jocko]

As Iraq has clearly demonstrated, blundering around the world like a bull in a china shop is not necessarily a better solution than letting the people of a country work out their issues for themselves.

And here I was, thinking to myself, "What kind of utter boob would be convinced by Saddam's 100% election win being indicative of a happy, prosperous population?"

Now I know.

 

[aerocontrols]

????

I'm sorry I confused you. Let me explain.

This statement, if true, would not make me laugh:

When the rest of the USSR fell, Ukraine didn't. I can only assume that Ukraine was not as resented or repressive as the rest of the USSR.

This statement would also not make me laugh:

When the USSR fell, Cuba didn't. I can only assume that Cuba was not as resented or repressive as the USSR.

Now, I might have a problem with that being your 'only assumption' (Surely you mean only reasonable conclusion?) but I wouldn't find it silly if you were to say that.

MattJ

 

[Rob Lister]

Perhaps the key to understanding Castro and how he came to power is understanding Cuba before Castro came to power.

When he dies, which should be any day now, U.S./Cuban relations will warm greatly --- assuming his brother does take over. If his brother has an accident shortly after Castro's death, I'm not sure what will happen. It just depends on who causes the accident.

Edit to add: a good starting place is the Treaty of Basel, for the obvious, or not so obvious reasons.

 

[dann]

I know this is simplistic, but...

I believe Castro is in power today for one reason only (No, not Castro). Castro remains in power becasue of U.S. sanctions.

Castro manipulates those sanctions to shore up his regime with nationalist (contra-Marxist, one might add) images that are easilly understood by his people -- a people with a history of foriegn domination. Castro says the US will invade, people become Cuban nationalists to protect the homeland (not Castro).

Your theory doesn't sound very probable - unless, of course, you assume that the Cubans might simply find their homeland worth defending ...
Is it possible that LostAngeles' assumptions are correct?

Originally posted by LostAngeles
I personally find Cuba eerily disturbing. I hear reports of a 95% literacy rate, everyone having health care, and people who remember the old government liking Castro very much since they have "more."

It is true: Cuba does have "a history of foreign domination" (Guess who!). It is true: The literacy in Cuba is probably higher than in the USA. It is true: Cubans not only have health care, but Cuba provides a lot of other third world countries with medical aid and doctors. (I've been told that Cuba even gives some Americans of limited means medical training - free of charge.) It is true that Cuba doesn't have what Americans would call a free press, but it is equally true that Cubans are very well informed about what is going on in the rest of the world. (Remember the literacy rate!) I have been to Cuba three times since 1999 (my government does not prevent me from going since I'm not a citizen of the land of the free). The last time was one week before I went to Las Vegas this January. So far the authorities at the airport have not investigated the reading material I brought into Cuba; one of my fellow travellers even brought a copy of a book written by one of Fidel Castro's daughters, the one supporting the anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Miami. (I don't remember if the book was in Spanish or English.)
In spite of the high average life expectancy of Cubans: 45 years after the revolution "people who remember the old government" do not constitute the majority of the population. But it is true: Most of those who remember Batista are very grateful to Fidel Castro for getting rid of him.
A lot of Cubans are Marxists. And a lot of them aren't. But many of those who aren't are still anti-(Norte)-American. Not because they are familiar with life in Miami, I presume, but rather because they know what it's like to live in Haiti or the Dominican Republic, particularly if you are black and poor.
Cuba is by no means a paradise. It is a very poor country. I haven't considered moving to Cuba, but .... if I were poor, Cuba would definitely be the third-world country I'd prefer to live in.

Do American politicians feel threatened by Cuba? No, it's a ridiculous notion! Does Castro annoy the US administration? Definitely! Why? "95% literacy rate, everyone having health care" and a lot of them actually "liking Castro very much", and all this in a third world country!!! Who wouldn't dislike a nuisance like that at one's own doorstep!!!

By the way, Castro doesn't have to manipulate "those sanctions to shore up his regime with nationalist (contra-Marxist, one might add) images". The sanctions and their purpose are a fact!

 

[a_unique_person]

I'm sorry I confused you. Let me explain.

This statement, if true, would not make me laugh:



This statement would also not make me laugh:



Now, I might have a problem with that being your 'only assumption' (Surely you mean only reasonable conclusion?) but I wouldn't find it silly if you were to say that.

MattJ

I was only drawing a quick, off the top of my head, inference. You may ignore it as you like. As the previous post shows, Castro is not loathed to any degree that many other 'communist' dictators were, nor is he as brutal.

I don't approve of his restrictions on freedom of speech.

 

[dann]

I was wondering: Americans (libertarian, liberals, right-wingers, whatever) are not allowed to go to Cuba (and Castro is not the one preventing them from going!), but is it still allowed to read Cuban newspapers? Some German friends told me that a Cuban doing them a favour had asked them for a subscription to the German magazine Der Spiegel in return. The only problem seemed to be that she couldn't afford it, not that she wasn't allowed to read it. And a lot of Cubans are now able to use the www at their workplace, but access is still restricted and much too expensive if you have to pay for it yourself.
I guess you Americans wouldn't have the same problem, so why don't you visit some of the Cuban websites? It's a very good way of ensuring that you get a versatile news coverage. You might try reading the English edition of the Cuban newspaper Grandma:
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html
I wouldn't say that a Castro speech isn't biased, but it is hardly more biased than what you hear every day from Bush, Cheney or other members of the Administration.

 

[dann]

Some figures on education and healthcare sevices are mentioned is this article: http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2004/junio/mier23/26epis2.html

I have to admit: The first time I went to Cuba in December-January 1998-99, I didn’t consider the living conditions of the Cubans. I had heard about the US-imposed embargo, but it didn’t really concern me in any way. I went there exclusively for the salsa. And I wasn’t disappointed. There just isn’t any other place on Earth where they make the kind of salsa you find in Cuba - and I'm not talking about the sauce.
Salsa is also one of the few commodities from Cuba that Americans are able to buy, I think. At least I found that Amazon sells one of the new salsa-timba CDs by Pupy y los que Son Son: Que Cosas Tiene la Vida. Listen to these samples, they are so hot!!! http://www.timba.com/artists/cesarpedroso/index.asp?page=pepe_pupy_review.htm
Amazon also stocks a fabulous DVD: Los Van Van Live at Miami Arena.
They won’t give you new insights into Cuban politics, but they will give you an impression of the indomitable Cuban spirit!

 

[Rob Lister]

Note: This post represents my amateur opinions. Anything that appears to be a statement of fact is really just an opinion of which I feel mildly justified in stating. Feel free do dis’ me but be nice.

I'm a capitalist at heart. I'm certainly no Castro apologist. But neither can I be a policy apologist on the part of the U.S. as it relates to Cuba. It isn't so much that it's a comedy of errors as it is a comedy of childish behavior on the part of the U.S. and Castro.

Castro found out early in his regime that he could stick his thumb in Uncle Sam's eye and get away with it. Watching the Uncle hem and haw impotently with each thumb-stick likely entertained Castro to no end (he had less than love for the U.S., and probably for very good reason. We, the U.S. behaved very badly regarding Cuba).

Castro knew he needed the U.S. but the U.S. did not need him, at least not in any appreciable economic manner. He also undoubtedly knew that most any economic deal he cut with the U.S. would result in a useful tool they could use against him and, perhaps more importantly, his form of government. Politically, and because of his stated ideology, the U.S. needed only one thing – that he either fall or at least change his stated methodology. Therefore, Castro knew that all tools the U.S. had, absent those economic deals, made the U.S. look like bullies, which, in the case of Cuba at least, they certainly were.

His relationship with the Soviet Union pretty much guaranteed his regime would prosper even if it also guaranteed economic hardship for Cubans in general (Castro's chosen form of socialism was better than most but it too was unsustainable). The Soviets also tried to use their aid and trade agreements to their advantage but Castro won that battle because he knew that their leverage in these matters was trivial at best. The Soviets actually needed Castro to prosper (in a political sense) more than Castro needed the Soviets (in an economic sense).

From Uncle Sam’s perspective, Castro was a really big problem. Not only was he an admitted communist, he was, as dictators go, fairly uncorrupted and actually benevolent. Certainly, the people of Cuba took the benevolent backseat, with his ideology riding shotgun up front, but if any dictator could make communism work, Castro was probably that dictator. If the U.S. lifted all sanctions, his regime would prosper greatly – really greatly. Communism, at least in the case of Cuba under Castro, would appear to work very well if open and unencumbered trade agreements existed. Castro could have funded the success of his socialist agenda through sugar exports alone - and damn the inefficiencies (somewhat like China does today but far less efficiently than Castro could have managed). Of course, it should be noted that absent the capitalistic nature of that potential partner above and to the left, those funds would not be available, as is evidenced by the lack of enough support by the Soviets who really wanted him to do as well as possible. They couldn’t afford it.

More later maybe.

 

[dann]

She was a practitioner of the Afro-Caribbean "Santeria" faith and also "business adviser" to the gang.

http://www.randi.org/jr/062504interesting.html#6

This excerpt from James Randi’s newsletter last week made me think:
Does anybody know anything about skepticism in Cuba? The last time I was there, probably December 27 or 28, 2003, I saw a TV-programme investigating precognition. It was in English with Spanish subtitles, and one of the cases was Gary Schwartz claiming to have proof that 9/11 had been preconceived by somebody who had even sent a letter to some embassy (I think it was) about it. After the programme (produced by an English-speaking TV-station) a Cuban expert was interviewed. Apparently (I don’t understand Spanish, my girlfriend understands some, but they were talking too fast for her to follow the dialogue) he completely dismissed any idea of precognition being for real.
I know that Santeria is widespread in Cuba, and not just among black Cubans, but what about skepticism? Does a ‘Habana Area Skeptics’ group exist? I cannot seem to find anything relevant when I make a google search …