Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama to normalize relations with Cuba

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Z,

    Loan gurantees is one thing. American troops and straight cash allotments is something totally different.

    Oh, and we gave to the Japanese as well.

    I know about the Dawes Plan...but the Dawes Plan was how to deal with reparations. The Marshall Plan repudiated reparations, a basic fundamental in post-war outcomes for centirues, and instead instuted a totally new approach.

    The Dawes Plan was how to mitigate a punishment. The Marshall Plan was how to get Europe, as well as our adversaries, back on their feet so they would not longer be adversaries.

    It may have been a continuation of ideas...but Truman's Administration put it into practical effect, and stayed the hand of further damage to the German economy by stopping the European Allies, priamrily the French, with the Petersburg Agreement, which set the framework for the Bonn-Paris Conventions.

    Without the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan and Petersburg Agreemnt, you don;t get there.

    And the US had NEVER been that involved in our history to that level to aid Allies as well as a former foe.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

    Comment


    • #77
      Sir, agree to dissagree that they were 180 degree departures. The Dawes Plan was modified by the Young plan... supported by John Foster Dulles who helped craft the preamble of the UN Charter. I say this to point out that on both sides of the aisle there was a belief of magnanimity in victory. Likely caused idealization of Appomattox. Kindness in victory while not uniquely American is a particular American trait going back to at least 1865.

      Comment


      • #78
        I find it interesting that everyone here, conservative, liberal, centrist, pragmatist, democrat, republican, independent, military, civilian, US, non-US, almost down to a man (and woman) supports opening relations with Cuba.

        Just about every single poster from gun forum that I visit was opposed to normalize relations with Cuba. There were a few for it, but they were far out-numbered by those who oppose.
        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by gunnut View Post
          I find it interesting that everyone here, conservative, liberal, centrist, pragmatist, democrat, republican, independent, military, civilian, US, non-US, almost down to a man (and woman) supports opening relations with Cuba.

          Just about every single poster from gun forum that I visit was opposed to normalize relations with Cuba. There were a few for it, but they were far out-numbered by those who oppose.
          In comparison with other countries the US has relations with, Cuba is none the worse. I think it will be nice to have relations with a country that has less oil and drama for a change. And in agreement with Yello, their cigars are one of a kind.
          :

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by gunnut View Post
            I find it interesting that everyone here, conservative, liberal, centrist, pragmatist, democrat, republican, independent, military, civilian, US, non-US, almost down to a man (and woman) supports opening relations with Cuba.

            Just about every single poster from gun forum that I visit was opposed to normalize relations with Cuba. There were a few for it, but they were far out-numbered by those who oppose.
            What are the arguments in opposition of normalized ties with Cuba? Even the most conservative Americans can see that the embargo hasn't had the intended effect.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by cataphract View Post
              What are the arguments in opposition of normalized ties with Cuba? Even the most conservative Americans can see that the embargo hasn't had the intended effect.
              The embargo is underrated. We demonstrated clearly the cost of popular revolution in the Post-War era and the cost of allying to the Soviet Union. The combination of the America embargo and economic mismanagement turned the Carribean's most prosperous economy into a shit-hole. After the collapse of the USSR, the ensuing "Special Period" basically meant total ruin for the Cuban economy.

              That's actual a very useful tool for certain aspects of Latin American policy: keep a lid on domestic discontent or you'll end up like Guatemala or Cuba. And definitely, definitely, definitely don't ally with the Soviets, or even make us THINK you're allying with the Soviets, because we will RUIN you.

              As for maintaining the embargo: I think it's pointless now. We have bigger fish to fry and it's more important for US-Latin American nations to cooperate than to brutally protect our sphere of influence. Different ball-game now. However, I think Americans vastly overestimate the productive value of our culture and liberal values in general. I think the idea that we will conquer the world with McDonald's will eventually come back to bite us in the ass, as cultures turn their nose up at our obese, 30% high school dropout, lolcatz loving culture.
              "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by cataphract View Post
                What are the arguments in opposition of normalized ties with Cuba? Even the most conservative Americans can see that the embargo hasn't had the intended effect.
                The argument FOR embargo is that we should not recognize the legitimacy of the Castros. They are evil men and should be punished. Legitimizing them is a slap to the face of those whom he victimized.
                "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                  The embargo is underrated. We demonstrated clearly the cost of popular revolution in the Post-War era and the cost of allying to the Soviet Union. The combination of the America embargo and economic mismanagement turned the Carribean's most prosperous economy into a shit-hole. After the collapse of the USSR, the ensuing "Special Period" basically meant total ruin for the Cuban economy.

                  That's actual a very useful tool for certain aspects of Latin American policy: keep a lid on domestic discontent or you'll end up like Guatemala or Cuba. And definitely, definitely, definitely don't ally with the Soviets, or even make us THINK you're allying with the Soviets, because we will RUIN you.

                  As for maintaining the embargo: I think it's pointless now. We have bigger fish to fry and it's more important for US-Latin American nations to cooperate than to brutally protect our sphere of influence. Different ball-game now. However, I think Americans vastly overestimate the productive value of our culture and liberal values in general. I think the idea that we will conquer the world with McDonald's will eventually come back to bite us in the ass, as cultures turn their nose up at our obese, 30% high school dropout, lolcatz loving culture.
                  The problem with embargo is it usually punishes the people at the bottom, the most helpless and the least involved.

                  Those at the top are not seriously affected. They still hold the power of life and death over those at the bottom. They still enjoy all the goods and services smuggled to them via black market. Think Kim Jung Un can't watch Youtube or browse this forum? Fidel still has his Mercedes.

                  Meanwhile, their people, whom we hope would rise up and remove these evil people, were starved to the point of incapable of offering a fight, and taught that their plight was due to the evil American imperialism.

                  The embargo usually has the desired effect, except the exact opposite result.
                  "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                    I find it interesting that everyone here, conservative, liberal, centrist, pragmatist, democrat, republican, independent, military, civilian, US, non-US, almost down to a man (and woman) supports opening relations with Cuba.

                    Just about every single poster from gun forum that I visit was opposed to normalize relations with Cuba. There were a few for it, but they were far out-numbered by those who oppose.
                    As I have commented on before this may be because many involved in the firearms politics in the US view all significant government policy decisions through the narrow lense of firearms politics I.e. liberals want to restrict my access to firearms so any policy that advances the cause of 'liberalism' must be bad while anything decision that advances conservatism is 'good'.
                    Last edited by Monash; 23 Dec 14,, 06:27.
                    If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      An embargo now serves what purpose? Cuba hasn't been a threat to U.S. national security for quite some time and as it is now, isn't any more odious than many countries US does business with, and much better than some.
                      All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                      -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                        The problem with embargo is it usually punishes the people at the bottom, the most helpless and the least involved.

                        Those at the top are not seriously affected. They still hold the power of life and death over those at the bottom. They still enjoy all the goods and services smuggled to them via black market. Think Kim Jung Un can't watch Youtube or browse this forum? Fidel still has his Mercedes.

                        Meanwhile, their people, whom we hope would rise up and remove these evil people, were starved to the point of incapable of offering a fight, and taught that their plight was due to the evil American imperialism.

                        The embargo usually has the desired effect, except the exact opposite result.
                        I don't buy this narrative. Cuba is not North Korea. Cuba is probably wealthier than most of Syria and Ukraine, for instance. We didn't starve them out of existence, and Cuba is free to trade with practically any of the other 200+ nations in the world.

                        Castro absolutely did have an iron grip on the nation, but expecting that to suddenly go away because we started trading with them is a little naïve. Decades of free trade haven't changed China, it just gives the Chinese more weapons to point at US carriers. Free trade is not a substitute for actual diplomacy.

                        The actual benefit is allowing more Cuban-Americans to go back to Cuba, but right now travel restrictions aren't lifted. Also, remittance payments will become a huge part of the Cuban economy, which gives the US some more leverage in future crises: we can always turn off the remittance payments and put future Cuban governments in quite a pickle.
                        "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          I think the ones who lose with the new opening of relations are only the privileged class of Cuba...
                          A big part of what allowed the regime to last until now was the tread of an American invasion, was to appeal to nationalism against the "liberal imperialist beast represented by the United States".
                          When I mean liberal, I am not using the American meaning of the word, that basically means someone with progressive left ideals, but how the rest of the world views the word "liberal".
                          Now that they don't have that power anymore, to appeal to patriotism and nationalism, a lot of the legitimacy of the Communist regime there faded away with the struck of a pen.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X