NationStates

Soldati senza confini wrote:

DnalweN acilbupeR wrote:On a more serious note, this can only be good news if it sours and weakens Cuba's relations with its' current allies, eventually. I don't want to hear of no Russian warship again.

Well from what I heard in the news Castro is willing to have a more open net, at great risk because this opens people to a world of information.

I did mention earlier that 'expansion of broadband internet markets' was part of the reason for the lifting of the embargo. I also cited the Associated Press article, as has Truth Out about the Chamber of Commerce spending heavily in the midterm elections, ($35million).
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/2 ... go-to-fall

Alien Space Bats wrote:

Sahrani South wrote:
So it doesn't really matter if we lift the embargo or not, save in so far as the embargo hurts America's image in Latin America, and should therefore be lifted in order to make things better everywhere ELSE in the hemisphere. As for Cuba and its future, what we need to do is wait and prepare for the day when Fidel is dead and Raoul nearly so, for [i]THAT will be when another "color revolution" brings liberty to Cuba at last.
.

I suspect that is coming very soon.

Teemant wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Did they get worse, or did the people below them get better? At any rate, as stated, that's a single metric. Come to think of it, where did they rate in the early 70s?

Considering the fact that out of 180 countries North Korea is ranked 179th and China 175th I'd say things haven't improved that much.

Okay, you're focusing on one metric and not directly answering my questions, so we're done.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

The Kievan People wrote:It is quite literally throwing money at Castro.

No deal will be made in Cuba without the regime getting a cut.

No.

Literally throwing money at Castro would involve being within throwing distance of him, and tossing coins and/or crumpled bills at him.

That actually sounds kind of fun, especially you use handfuls of pennies.

Teemant wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Are you saying that there has been no improvement in China since we opened diplomatic relations and trade? It's not a democracy as of yet, and perhaps it never will be, but it is a significantly more open society than it was in the early 70s.

Out of 180 countries China is ranked 175th in press freedom.

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

That doesn't prove anything about how the current situation compares to China's own past.

Standards of living have risen and access to foreign media has increased dramatically.

Sahrani South wrote:Time for a second American Revolution!!!

The South tried that in 1861. Bad idea.

Sahrani South wrote:A good president would have the CIA oust the dirty communist Castro and install democracy in Cuba. Hell, why not annex it in the US proper and make it together with Puerto Rico the 51st "Caribbean" State. It is time that we finally show the world that USA is still #1 and not begin talking to commies like we were some european bs country. We Americans have the technology and the warfare to rule these people, we should take advantage of the opportunity while they are weak and still poor and bomb them to kingdom come. We should then make a move to conquer that territory and make it a part of the United States of America to show all other countries USA is #1. We rule this world and if anyone gets in our way we will smash you!!!

No, no, no, incorporating Cuba into the US would undermine the racial purity of our nation.

Parti Ouvrier wrote:

Alien Space Bats wrote:

I suspect that is coming very soon.

The brothers have already appointed someone from the old guard to the number two position. When the brothers are no longer around that person will decide who in the younger leadership gets to be at the top.

Read this on the guy who is responsible for introducing the market economy. Some say he could be the President in the future.

http://news.yahoo.com/cuban-cabinet-cha ... iness.html

and this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marino_Murillo

Edit - Found out the guy the brothers appointed retired. So better chance for the economic architect.

I hope this link works, it might not, so I will then delete the post and try again.

Found this: Chris Matthew Hardball Fair and Balanced:

I think Chris Matthew asked a few good questions to his guests. His guests gave a few good answers. I agree with Chris Mattew's views and comments. As a native Cuban and Cuban American citizen this is a very personal issue for me.

http://www.msnbc.com/hardball

Greater Miami Shores wrote:I hope this link works, it might not, so I will then delete the post and try again.

Found this: Chris Matthew Hardball Fair and Balanced:

I think Chris Matthew asked a few good questions to his guests. His guests gave a few good answers. I agree with Chris Mattew's views and comments. As a native Cuban and Cuban American citizen this is a very personal issue for me.

http://www.msnbc.com/hardball

As someone who really can't play the video since I'm restricted to my phone, I'd like to ask, what points does he make?

Good.

Fortschritte wrote:

Greater Miami Shores wrote:I hope this link works, it might not, so I will then delete the post and try again.

Found this: Chris Matthew Hardball Fair and Balanced:

I think Chris Matthew asked a few good questions to his guests. His guests gave a few good answers. I agree with Chris Mattew's views and comments. As a native Cuban and Cuban American citizen this is a very personal issue for me.

http://www.msnbc.com/hardball

As someone who really can't play the video since I'm restricted to my phone, I'd like to ask, what points does he make?

Well I checked the link and it did not work. So I will try again. I should have included like I thought, please do not quote me directly until I have time to check the link. INow I cant delete the failed link, but Is ok though. Tp answer your questions: Chris Matthew says he understands the feelings of persons like myself against Obama's actions. Including our feelings with what happened with Elian Gonzalez. He thinks Obama's action on Cuba will not change the nature of the Castro brothers government. His other guest, Cuban American Journalist Jose Diaz-Balart gives an exsample of a Cuban American co-worker who came on a raft with his cousins to live in a free nation the USA, and saw his cousins being eaten alive by sharks.Jose Diaz-Balart, also talks about the codified laws of the embargo. His other guest Eugene Robinson, thinks Obama's policy is not a win for the Cuban government and thinks its a win for the Cuban people. I think their other comments are worth seeing and listen too, no matter our personal views.

As I keep stating, this so called new approach of President Obama, is the same failed approach practiced by Canda and the EU nations that does not work. No wonder. As long as the CDRs in Cuba exsist their will be no real changes in Cuba by the Cuban government you can believe in. I just found a link that should work. But don't know why it took so long on my computer to work. So I will post it.

I hope this link works, it might not, so I will then delete the post and try again.

Found this: Chris Matthew Hardball Fair and Balanced:

I think Chris Matthew asked a few good questions to his guests. His guests gave a few good answers. I agree with Chris Mattew's views and comments. As a native Cuban and Cuban American citizen this is a very personal issue for me.

Obama makes history with Cuba:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbeGoS6ynts

As I keep stating, this so called new approach of President Obama, is the same failed approach practiced by Canda and the EU nations that does not work. No wonder. As long as the CDRs in Cuba exsist their will be no real changes in Cuba by the Cuban government you can believe in.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Teemant wrote:
Considering the fact that out of 180 countries North Korea is ranked 179th and China 175th I'd say things haven't improved that much.

Okay, you're focusing on one metric and not directly answering my questions, so we're done.

Well well well. Funny.

You said that China is singificantly more open society than it was in the 70s. Where is your proof that it actually is?
I just said that China isn't open society and had a source to back it. You have nothing. I replied to your claim so it's time for you to find some sources!

Teemant wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Okay, you're focusing on one metric and not directly answering my questions, so we're done.

Well well well. Funny.

You said that China is singificantly more open society than it was in the 70s. Where is your proof that it actually is?
I just said that China isn't open society and had a source to back it. You have nothing. I replied to your claim so it's time for you to find some sources!

Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Teemant wrote:
Well well well. Funny.

You said that China is singificantly more open society than it was in the 70s. Where is your proof that it actually is?
I just said that China isn't open society and had a source to back it. You have nothing. I replied to your claim so it's time for you to find some sources!

Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

Very big difference, not really, just the same dog with a different collar. From my personal view point.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Teemant wrote:
Well well well. Funny.

You said that China is singificantly more open society than it was in the 70s. Where is your proof that it actually is?
I just said that China isn't open society and had a source to back it. You have nothing. I replied to your claim so it's time for you to find some sources!

Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

Funnily enough, the cultural revolution was the golden era for criticizing the party, so long as the criticism was being insufficiently maoist.

Kubra wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

Funnily enough, the cultural revolution was the golden era for criticizing the party, so long as the criticism was being insufficiently maoist.

Exactly. "We are open to criticism, so long as the criticism says that we need to go in one particular direction."

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Teemant wrote:
Well well well. Funny.

You said that China is singificantly more open society than it was in the 70s. Where is your proof that it actually is?
I just said that China isn't open society and had a source to back it. You have nothing. I replied to your claim so it's time for you to find some sources!

Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

It is bad. If you read the Freedom of Expression part you can't say that China has become more open country.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Kubra wrote: Funnily enough, the cultural revolution was the golden era for criticizing the party, so long as the criticism was being insufficiently maoist.

Exactly. "We are open to criticism, so long as the criticism says that we need to go in one particular direction."

That goes on in Cuba too from before this so called new approach by President Obama that has been tried and dosent work. Which proves my points. From my personal point of view.

Teemant wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Here's an overview of China's human rights issues as of today. Pretty dismal, right?

Now compare it to this.

It is bad. If you read the Freedom of Expression part you can't say that China has become more open country.

I'm not saying that it's not bad. It is bad. But it's better than it was. And yes, I read that part, and yes, it is more open, if only incrementally. They're shutting down blogs, but they're not putting bullets in the backs of the heads of bloggers.

At any rate, this conversation is exhausting. I invited you to understand what I was trying to say regarding how open trade and diplomatic relationships with various totalitarian "communist" states had been followed by a gradual lessening of restrictions. Rather than look at the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe, you chose to focus on the one nation that wasn't in the Soviet Bloc (China), and focus on a single metric (press freedom), while ignoring literally every other nation that we opened trade with.

Even granting that China is still a totalitarian nightmare, it has less in common with Cuba than the former Warsaw Pact nations, and the Warsaw Pact nations have less in common with it than literally every single nation in Central and South America. You're looking at a culture based largely on Confucian principles, and attempting to compare it with one that isn't based upon such principles. Change in China tends to be incremental. As we saw in the late 80s and early 90s, that isn't necessarily so elsewhere.

A question for you: Since China is still such an issue, would you support an embargo on them?

Greater Miami Shores wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Exactly. "We are open to criticism, so long as the criticism says that we need to go in one particular direction."

That goes on in Cuba too from before this so called new approach by President Obama that has been tried and dosent work. Which proves my points. From my personal point of view.

Criticism of the party of a certain type is allowed? Could you point me to a source for that?

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Teemant wrote:
It is bad. If you read the Freedom of Expression part you can't say that China has become more open country.

I'm not saying that it's not bad. It is bad. But it's better than it was. And yes, I read that part, and yes, it is more open, if only incrementally. They're shutting down blogs, but they're not putting bullets in the backs of the heads of bloggers.

At any rate, this conversation is exhausting. I invited you to understand what I was trying to say regarding how open trade and diplomatic relationships with various totalitarian "communist" states had been followed by a gradual lessening of restrictions. Rather than look at the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe, you chose to focus on the one nation that wasn't in the Soviet Bloc (China), and focus on a single metric (press freedom), while ignoring literally every other nation that we opened trade with.

Even granting that China is still a totalitarian nightmare, it has less in common with Cuba than the former Warsaw Pact nations, and the Warsaw Pact nations have less in common with it than literally every single nation in Central and South America. You're looking at a culture based largely on Confucian principles, and attempting to compare it with one that isn't based upon such principles. Change in China tends to be incremental. As we saw in the late 80s and early 90s, that isn't necessarily so elsewhere.

A question for you: Since China is still such an issue, would you support an embargo on them?

Probably the US getting closer to China would have never happened without the Sino-Soviet split.

I'll be so glad when Obama is gone.

DnalweN acilbupeR wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
I'm not saying that it's not bad. It is bad. But it's better than it was. And yes, I read that part, and yes, it is more open, if only incrementally. They're shutting down blogs, but they're not putting bullets in the backs of the heads of bloggers.

At any rate, this conversation is exhausting. I invited you to understand what I was trying to say regarding how open trade and diplomatic relationships with various totalitarian "communist" states had been followed by a gradual lessening of restrictions. Rather than look at the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe, you chose to focus on the one nation that wasn't in the Soviet Bloc (China), and focus on a single metric (press freedom), while ignoring literally every other nation that we opened trade with.

Even granting that China is still a totalitarian nightmare, it has less in common with Cuba than the former Warsaw Pact nations, and the Warsaw Pact nations have less in common with it than literally every single nation in Central and South America. You're looking at a culture based largely on Confucian principles, and attempting to compare it with one that isn't based upon such principles. Change in China tends to be incremental. As we saw in the late 80s and early 90s, that isn't necessarily so elsewhere.

A question for you: Since China is still such an issue, would you support an embargo on them?

Probably the US getting closer to China would have never happened without the Sino-Soviet split.

Despite being irrelevant to the larger discussion, that's true, and the outreach is historically seen as one of the finest and smartest moments in American diplomacy. Nixon may have disgraced the office with his conduct, but he at least had that to look back on.