Rumor Control: Fidel Castro had died

[habernac]

I think it's laughable that anyone thinks Cuba is better off with their dictator for life in charge. Shame on both sides for letting this go on so long. The embargo is a joke, the Soviet Union is long dead. They have diplomatic relations with China, who have a far poorer track record on human rights. End the embargo and help the people.

[Zarathustra]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

And you assumed I was trolling because.....

My theory is there are a lot of young and inexperienced posters here who delve into these discussions and have preconceived (for whatever reason) anti-American views which they project on everything they discuss.

As for the PMing thing, it was just a crack on you for calling out 'the mods', geez I thought you were joking. If that's your style, more power to you but I have zero to worry about. Trust me.

I assumed you were trolling because it's obvious that the United States and Fidel Castro have a previous history and that yes, this particular dilemma could be considered a problem involving the United States. I thought your question in this particular thread was ridiculous and out of place in this thread. It also looked as thought you were trying to get a reaction out of anti-American posters. Trying to get an ugly reaction out of another poster is considered trolling or baiting.

Second, I'm not sure exactly how a poster with less posts and that hasn't been around the message board as long as others has an opinion that is less valued. Your theory seems to have preconceived and stereotypical views in itself.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Whoa, totally missed this gem. Please, elaborate! How in the hell is this a FACT?

Can't say it's a fact since it never happened but at the time of Castro's revolution the media was reporting that Castro had communists around such as Che but Castro wasn't a communist.
In fact Castro had a history of democracy and had run for election when Batista overthrew the democracy in Cuba and he didn't declare he was a Marxist Leninist until 1961. When Castro threw out the Mafia and nationalized the American telephone company [Bennet did the same in BC] the USA was put in an awkward position and wouldn't back down. Poor diplomacy on both parts that almost led to WWIII and continues stupidly today.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/COLDcastroF.htm

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

I assumed you were trolling because it's obvious that the United States and Fidel Castro have a previous history and that yes, this particular dilemma could be considered a problem involving the United States. I thought your question in this particular thread was ridiculous and out of place in this thread. It also looked as thought you were trying to get a reaction out of anti-American posters. Trying to get an ugly reaction out of another poster is considered trolling or baiting.

Second, I'm not sure exactly how a poster with less posts and that hasn't been around the message board as long as others has an opinion that is less valued. Your theory seems to have preconceived and stereotypical views in itself.

I should've quoted exactly what I was responding to instead of asking the question generally, and again...this is the result of multiple threads not just this one...but you wouldn't have known that.

Secondly, inexperienced does not refer to Calgarypuck.com. Sheesh. I'm talking about life experience. Life experience changes your viewpoint. I could not care less how many posts somebody has. It means nothing. I'm not 12.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

I'm not going to read all of that anti-Castro rhetoric. Post a link or quote in which a credible source says that the embargo will be lifted once Castro holds democratic elections.

Well Im sorry I didnt follow your self-implemented timeline on this... but here you go.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13806504/

and here...again this is from Congress so im not sure its good enough for you or not.

(1) SUSPENSION- The President is authorized to suspend the
prohibition contained in subsection (a) upon a determination
made under section 203(c)(1) that a transition government in
Cuba is in power

(2) TRANSITION GOVERNMENT- Once the President submits a
determination under section 203(c)(1) that a transition
government in Cuba is in power--
(A) the President is encouraged to take steps to support
the processing of Cuba's application for membership in any
international financial institution, subject to the
membership taking effect after a democratically elected
government in Cuba is in power, and
(B) the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to
instruct the United States executive director of each
international financial institution to support loans or
other assistance to Cuba only to the extent that such loans
or assistance contribute to a stable foundation for a
democratically elected government in Cuba.

The President should instruct the United States Permanent
Representative to the Organization of American States to oppose and
vote against any termination of the suspension of the Cuban
Government from participation in the Organization until the
President determines under section 203(c)(3) that a democratically elected government in Cuba is in power.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/...w/h927_enr.htm



http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0020520-1.html

So its rather apparent that the USA's position is that once Castro is gone and/or a democratic government is elected, they will suspend the embargo.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

^^^^ Even if that democratically elected government is another communist one? I'll believe that load of bull**** when I see it. The embargo should have been lifted when the Soviet Union fell IMO. Cuba has not been a threat to anyone in 45 years. It's done. They're a third world nation. America is just punishing the innocent by blockading the country.

[FlamesAddiction]

I thought it was funny how Castro offered aid to New Orleans after Katrina, and the U.S. was too proud to accept it. It probably would have gone a long way to improving relations among the 2 countries.

[Flame On]

Dis, not saying Cuba's problems are the US's fault. But they have a hand in their problems, even if getting out of them is largely their own deal.
However, I also think its a little naieve to suppose (as has been done in this thread, not necessarily by you) that the largest economy and wealthiest nation in the world, having large trade embargos and travelling restrictions on a small country, is not going to restrict somewhat, its ability to climb out of said problems.
Being tired of hearing the US is at fault for this and that, doesn't mean that there isn't a lot of debate that can be thrown at the US for this and that.
To be fair though I guess you didn't really say the US wasn't at fault for anything. lol
Anyway not trying to attack you just saying there's a lot to debate right now in the world.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

Do these people put any blame on the American government for their oppressing trade embargo that caused this poverty?

If the Americans put a trade embargo on Canada, I'm sure there would be a large number of people who would blame them. If Canada fell to horrible conditions, there would be a larger number of people who would blame the Canadian leaders for letting that happen.

I think that's the point that you, and others, are missing.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

It also looked as thought you were trying to get a reaction out of anti-American posters.

So you admit that you are anti-American...

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Cuba has not been a threat to anyone in 45 years. It's done. They're a third world nation. America is just punishing the innocent by blockading the country.

I fail to see the reason for lifting the blockade/sanctions when the country doesn't change. So what if the country is poor? It's the leader of the country who is letting that happen, and unless he changes his stripes, he will continue to be the same person he's always been.

People in this world constantly hammer Bush for being a neo-con and acting a certain way. They point to his supposed secret history (taking the posts at face value) and show he has a history and plans for a certain type of behavior.

These same people usually expose the opinion that other people, who have a proven and documented track record of acting a certain way, have changed because they aren't a risk anymore... because their countries' innocent people are being impacted.

Don't you see the double standard? If you're condemning Bush for his "history", then why not do the same for others??

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Zarathustra

I'm not going to read all of that anti-Castro rhetoric. Post a link or quote in which a credible source says that the embargo will be lifted once Castro holds democratic elections.

And just how would you react if someone said:

"I'm not going to real all of that pro-Castro rhretoric. Post a link or quote in which a credible source says ..."

Pro-Castro / Anti-Castro.. it's all just words until you put your own unique spin on them and decide if they coincide with your thoughts. Obviously, from your post history, anything that you disagree with is just propaganta or anti-x rhetoric. Sigh...

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I thought it was funny how Castro offered aid to New Orleans after Katrina, and the U.S. was too proud to accept it. It probably would have gone a long way to improving relations among the 2 countries.

I agree... although I wonder if there were "hidden strings" for the aid.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

My bad...didnt read the article yet.

But the US doesn't have autonomy to deal with who they like....they HAD to buy sugar from Castro?

Like I said...if castro had gone to a democratic system, the embargo was gonzo..he refused.

What about your oil argument? Why did they need the USA for that? How was it the USA's responsibility to supply Oil to a country whom they didnt have/share similar beliefs with?



Forced how exactly? They were and are free to make any choices they like.

Again.....I have listened to Cubans that escaped. They hate the man, and if he dies, its a GOOD thing for their people according to them. They cant wait til he is gone. (Point of the thread)


LOL...Ok...if you have a better take on the situation than those that lived it...rock on dude!!

I was going to read the rest of the thred before posting, but I cant old my tongue another SECOND.

Transplant, I think you are one of the best posters on this board, Flames related and otherwise, but I cant believe some the comment your making in this thread.

Firstly, I am glad you have had some conversations with a few of the countries "escapees", I respect their oppinions, but I HAVE acctually been to Cuba 3 times in the last 5 years(one of he best resort destinations in the world BTW). While there I have gone into a couple of the main population hubs including Havana and talked to countless Cubans. A lot of them of course are not well versed in Englsh, but those who are(ussually cab drivers, bigger store owners etc.) are very happy to talk about their country and th reality of their situation. Because of my immense intrest in Castro and Cuba I made a point to try and get info out of as many Cubans as i could, here is a summation of what I got, with a few exceptions of course, and what i make of it.

1) the Cuban people do NOT live in poverty, because of the communist system Castro governs from within everyone in the country lives at a very good standard(maybe lower than the west), but 25x better than than the slums and hell holes the fil most of Mexico, Dominican Republic. Unlike Cuba the aforrmentiond countries have people who are "haves" and "have nots", because of their bad econmies and bad governments, large portions of these Democratic countries have their people living in ramshackled huts and burning their garbage on the side of main roads(im not assuming this either, this is FACT, I have seen it with my own eyes)

2) Some cubans may want to leave, but it is FAR from a majority. We will never no for sure, but i would bet if the border was opened up by Fidel tommorow, you would have a large intial exodus(5-10% of pop.), and that would be about it. Like any country some people want to leave, its only magnified beacuse of the sanctions placed on the Cubans so they cant leave. I will agree with you its not right to immpose the sancions on his people the way Castro has, but that is not the beginning and end of his story.

3) Fidel does NOT rule with an iron fist, hearing you say that is humorous, and shows that either you dont care about the truth, or are buying into the propaganda the western(american) media has been selling for 40+ years. From the people I have talked to in Cuba, and readings I have done I can tell you that despite the afformentioned sanctions, Fidel is LOVED by most of his people(i guarntee his aprroval ratings would KILL that of Bush on his best day, not the point though). Not only that, but the social programs that have sprung up ovr the past 2 decades in Cuba are amazing(25x better than anything the neighbouring democratic countries Mexico, DR, haiti, Jamacia etc have offered or ever will offer, barring radical changes. Health care in Cuba is very good, bloody great when you look at the battered economy they deal with. So bloody great in fact that as of 2002 average life expectancy of a Cuban was only 2 years shorter than that of a Canadian, pretty good for a 3rd world county.


Lastly i just want you to tell me why Cuba should revert to Democracy, as you have alluded to numerous times? Is it beacuse Communism is evil? Because the US government mantains it is wrong? Or because it seems to work so well elewhere in the region - in areas with very similar natural resources(and MANY more trading partners I may add)?

Is Democracy the only viable political ideology? Does it work best in every region, with every group of people and every different economic structure? If you say yes to any of the above, please explain, i would love to here your comments

[White Doors]

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for everything else that has been tried.

I'd be interested in you telling me how you seem to infer that communism is better than democracy?

Ready?

Go!

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't think there is a "one-size fits all" form of government. It depends on so many cultural, economic, and social conditions that it is impossible to say that one is better than the other.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't think there is a "one-size fits all" form of government. It depends on so many cultural, economic, and social conditions that it is impossible to say that one is better than the other.

I would totally agree 100%.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't think there is a "one-size fits all" form of government. It depends on so many cultural, economic, and social conditions that it is impossible to say that one is better than the other.

Democracy isn't a one size fits all government. It is precisely the opposite of that. A democracy is whatever the people make it and that's precisely why it is the best form available.

[White Doors]

You're dodging Kipper, tell me why communism is better than democracy.

time to balls-up

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by White Doors

You're dodging Kipper, tell me why communism is better than democracy.

time to balls-up

Im dodging, you posted like 3 minutes ago, calm down pal.

Before I go an further, quote the part of my post where i said communism is better?