Comments on: CNN Democratic Debate: Liveblogging

By: Ian

Ian — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:02:39 +0000

Cameron,

Castro has sent doctors to Venezuela in exchange for oil. I don’t know if that means much other than just trade. Seems odd to trade doctors.

By: Cameron

Cameron — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:20:51 +0000

I think whose fault it is is kinda irrelevant. Whereas dealing with real-world results does tend to lead one to Ian’s stance. We have no practical reason to treat on Castro better than another. About the only thing Cuba could do to make things worse for us is to join in a union with Venezuela, and while I’m sure Chavez would love that, it’ll be a cold day in hell before Cuba allows it to happen. So yeah. We hold all the cards. Might as well use them.

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:08:27 +0000

The USSR and the KGB helped prop up Castro’s government which we refused to recognize. The KGB is part of the reason the Bay of Pigs failed.

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:15:08 +0000

Because like I said, we hold all the bargaining chips. We don’t stand to gain much of anything by changing our policy towards them.

We should change our policy toward them precisely because we hold all the bargaining chips. We have to decide if we're going to be humane or if we're going to continue a policy that has produced nothing in terms of favorable results. I personally would like our country to be surrounded by allies and not enemies.

The same leaders who put them in the situation they are in now are in power, so I don’t see why we should just forgive them. The Bay of Pigs was done under the leadership of Kennedy, who is dead now.

Every successive U.S. government that hasn't ended the embargo is just as responsible for it as the one that started it. Hell, Bush has even tightened the embargo.

The KGB was just as involved in helping Castro to power as our CIA was for trying to get rid of him.

I have never read nor seen any proof that the KGB helped Castro's revolution.

By: Ian

Ian — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:32:59 +0000

Because like I said, we hold all the bargaining chips. We don’t stand to gain much of anything by changing our policy towards them. They stand to gain a lot by changing how they run things. The same leaders who put them in the situation they are in now are in power, so I don’t see why we should just forgive them. The Bay of Pigs was done under the leadership of Kennedy, who is dead now. Getting pissy about the Bay of Pigs is horseshit anyways. The KGB was just as involved in helping Castro to power as our CIA was for trying to get rid of him. Cuba was used as a Cold War pawn by the Soviets, and Castro is the one who let them do it.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 21:01:43 +0000

If it wasn’t unprovoked, then why should we be taking this holier than thou stance toward them?

By: Ian

Ian — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:05:04 +0000

Me not giving a shit: 2008

I never said it was unprovoked.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:22:10 +0000

Bay of Pigs: April 1961
USSR decides to give nukes to Cuba: May 1962

By: Ian

Ian — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:08:40 +0000

Its not just some minor “difference” between us and Cuba. They had nuclear weapons aimed at us. Russia and China aren’t just off the coast of Florida. The Cuban missile crisis was probably the closest the world came to ending in nuclear war. Russia is now Russia, not the USSR, and its not quite the same. Cuba hasn’t really changed at all. Plus, Cuba isn’t in the position to bargain in any economic or even militaristic sense. If they could show they have turned over a new leaf, fine, then we can begin discussions with them. We hold all the chips, they aren’t in a position to bargain.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:29:48 +0000

By that reasoning, no one in the world should talk to us. Especially not Russia or China. How are we going to move past our differences if we don’t talk to people?