Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have to say yes. Cuba once was a paradise but was tainted by Marxists such as Castro, who had the ingratitude to threaten war against the same country that armed Cuba during its independence struggle with Spain. And countries such as Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela have all become strongly anti-America (and anti-Israel) following the lead of the nasty Soviet puppet (now a Chinese puppet?) that is Cuba. And while the Vietnam War was devastating to both Vietnam and the Americans who served there, I really think the hippies and liberals erred in siding with North Vietnam in that conflict. I believe Lyndon Johnson erred by invading Vietnam and not Cuba, but LBJ was right in believing the South Vietnamese struggle for freedom from communism was equal to the African American struggle for civil rights at home, especially in the Southern states.
Decades of sanctions have done literally nothing but starve the people while the tyrants remain in charge with time being their only threat.
When something doesn't work - for many, many years - it's time to try a new tactic.
Sadly, those on the far right simply suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome and would have lost their marble no matter what Obama had done, even if he copied it verse by verse from Saint Reagan. Oh, and there's the subset of that group who just wants to bomb Cuba, the USSR, and everything else that's "Unamerican," so they are also pissed.
Will the change in relationships work? Who knows - but what's been in place for 40+ years now has clearly failed, so there's no point in continuing that path even further.
As for Vietnam, no "hippies or liberals" sided with the North. They simply said that we shouldn't be meddling in a local war where both sides were corrupt. Look up the facts - there were NO saints leading either side in Vietnam. And, "hippy" disparagement aside, those opposed to the war were right. We had no business being there, and we achieved absolutely nothing - and there is nothing that could have been achieved no matter which corrupt government (north or south) we supported.
This is repeated over and over again in American foreign policy - the nutty notion that siding with the slightly less evil side who happens to mumble the word "democracy" now and then will pay off. Then, a decade or so later, we get blowback in the face as the goons we supported turn against us.
Decades of sanctions have done literally nothing but starve the people while the tyrants remain in charge with time being their only threat.
When something doesn't work - for many, many years - it's time to try a new tactic.
Sadly, those on the far right simply suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome and would have lost their marble no matter what Obama had done, even if he copied it verse by verse from Saint Reagan. Oh, and there's the subset of that group who just wants to bomb Cuba, the USSR, and everything else that's "Unamerican," so they are also pissed.
Will the change in relationships work? Who knows - but what's been in place for 40+ years now has clearly failed, so there's no point in continuing that path even further.
As for Vietnam, no "hippies or liberals" sided with the North. They simply said that we shouldn't be meddling in a local war where both sides were corrupt. Look up the facts - there were NO saints leading either side in Vietnam. And, "hippy" disparagement aside, those opposed to the war were right. We had no business being there, and we achieved absolutely nothing - and there is nothing that could have been achieved no matter which corrupt government (north or south) we supported.
This is repeated over and over again in American foreign policy - the nutty notion that siding with the slightly less evil side who happens to mumble the word "democracy" now and then will pay off. Then, a decade or so later, we get blowback in the face as the goons we supported turn against us.
I have to say yes. Cuba once was a paradise but was tainted by Marxists such as Castro, who had the ingratitude to threaten war against the same country that armed Cuba during its independence struggle with Spain. And countries such as Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela have all become strongly anti-America (and anti-Israel) following the lead of the nasty Soviet puppet (now a Chinese puppet?) that is Cuba. And while the Vietnam War was devastating to both Vietnam and the Americans who served there, I really think the hippies and liberals erred in siding with North Vietnam in that conflict. I believe Lyndon Johnson erred by invading Vietnam and not Cuba, but LBJ was right in believing the South Vietnamese struggle for freedom from communism was equal to the African American struggle for civil rights at home, especially in the Southern states.
Right...
You do now that Castro, the one you are referring to, is not in power anymore. Fidel stepped down in 2008, giving power to his brother Raul, who may be ideologically the same, has not done any of the things you accused Fidel of doing. So, Obama meeting with Castro is not nearly what you think it is, because this Castro is not the same Castro who was in power during the Cold War.
We also shouldn't base our foreign policy on if they like Israel or not. That's silly and short sighted of us.
No one sided with North Vietnam. Even if the liberals and hippies you speak of (this level of bias should really be restricted to the PoC subforum) would like to live in a Communist society, North Vietnam would not be the ideal model they used. Those who opposed the war in Vietnam were not doing so because they wanted North Vietnam to win; they did it because it was a waste of a war.
And what exactly has Cuba done to us? Nothing. And it would be without evidence to suggest that the lack of problems from Cuba is because of the sanctions.
Both the Castro brothers will be dead within my life time. Cuba will likely suffer a radical change in government once Raul has died. If we establish a good relationship with them now, we may be able to nudge Cuba is a better direction when that volatile time comes.
I say it is a good step but we need to tread lightly.
I know a woman who has been to Cuba twice and she thought the people were amazing. I suspect that it is in Cuba like it is here our leaders play politics while the rest of us just try to live a decent life.
I'd like to see Cuba opened up for tourists with regular flights to and from.
I don't agree with half of what Obama does but this reaching out to Castro is a good idea.
Cuba is still a paradise. The Castro regime reduced the country into such poverty that large parts of the island have reverted back to their natural state. The island is now very much like it was 80 or 90 years ago, and will offer tourists from all over the world an experience they can't have on other Caribbean islands any more.
The Castro brothers are both old, and won't be around for much longer. Once they're gone, dropping our sanctions will only help the Cubans regain their democracy once more, and as the foreign investment returns, tossing out the aging Communists will only speed up.
Was right now the best time to change our position? Who knows? I think it was pretty good timing; it's always better to be a little early to the party than being late, and the next few years will see a lot of changes happening there. Not all of them will be bad for us and our interests, but I don't expect everything that comes from this will only be good for us. I only believe we will see more good than bad come from it.
If nothing else, this move just denied Putin his last toehold in the New World, and that's a pretty good move by itself.
If nothing else, this move just denied Putin his last toehold in the New World, and that's a pretty good move by itself.
I thought Putin (and most if not all Russians, Ukrainians, Kazakhs, etc that were alive before the Soviet collapse) long ago renounced their past communism. No?
It's not surprising that laughingstock Obama cowtows to Raul Castro, allowing that b- - - - - - to dictate terms and make demands on us.. Instead of shaking his hand, he should have said, "You get nothing...nothing...until you return Alan Gross.
Why am I not surprised? After all, Iran's getting billions, and a friggin ex-FBI agent's been held over there for eight years. No wonder everyone's laughing at us.
no, if cuba wants to be a communist country, why should we care. why do we have to push democratic on anybody. yes i like to visit cuba, i don't care if they are communist, I don't care about china human rights, i don't care about the middle east policy on gays. Its none of my business and should be none of the united states business.
no, if cuba wants to be a communist country, why should we care. why do we have to push democratic on anybody. yes i like to visit cuba, i don't care if they are communist, I don't care about china human rights, i don't care about the middle east policy on gays. Its none of my business and should be none of the united states business.
Global Exchange still legal tours to Cuba, AFAIK. People have always been able to visit Cuba from the US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
