You know Rube, I wish you would offer more than a glib one liner to describe policy decisions like that. You know it's far more complex than just calling it gross.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden...6195b692015605
Quote:
WHAT SET OFF THE PROTESTS?
Cuba’s government blames hardships on U.S. sanctions that it calculates cost the island $5.5 billion last year, though the figure is strongly disputed by its critics. It also claims the U.S. government and its enemies in the U.S. of using social media tools such as Twitter to send messages organizing the street protests.
Critics blame the government’s failure to shake up the eternally dismal state-run economy. While the government has created a series of broader openings for small-scale private businesses, they remain tightly controlled and limited. Cuba also has relied in recent years on tourism — income that has been devastated by the global pandemic — and on aid from ally Venezuela, which has declined along with Venezuela’s own economy.
A move this year to combine the country’s two sorts of currency into one also caused sharp inflation.
|
Okay, so let's say that everything about the hardships of Cuba is because of American sanctions. On the other hand, the people themselves say it isn't sanctions themselves, but a poorly run country that is to blame, and many are calling for an overthrowing of an authoritarian regime.
The slightly cynical but positive side in me says he is issuing sanctions to pressure the government to make substantial changes in policy or perhaps creating enough tension in the population to make wholesale government changes.
The more cynical side in me is saying he is doing so to gain Latino voters in Florida for the next election.
Either way, if the end result is a loosening of authoritarian control of a poor country, or a wholesale government change leading to eventual progress for the people, is that not a good thing overall?