But Juan we need to believe the bedtime stories of rampant murdering! Please tell how he rampantly murders! I don't like all these numbers, especially looking how we execute more people and have a greater % of our population in prison. No, no. No numbers please... Tell about how he chews up children and then how he rapes and murders! Pretty please!
I guess your bud Castro didn't do this......guess they didn't like that great education and health care system down....so they must die. Wow, what a ****ing humanitarian!
that's funny and all..but would you want to live under Castro? do you not seem as a dictator? i don't think you can measure this stuff by degrees..."well..he's not as bad as Stalin...so he's a prince!!" huh??
Or......try this....... From the U.S. State Dept....no conservative organisation there http://www.nocastro.com/documents/facts/zenith.htm Or this.....his supposed great health care system may be beating ploughshares into swords for bioweapons.... http://www.nocastro.com/Terrorism/germ%20weapons.htm Lastly.....here's a link about Castro's money-laundering...... http://www.cubacenter.org/media/archives/2001/summer/castro_brothers2.html How can you defend this butcher? He is the personification of evil and we would be doing the Cuban people a favor by overthrowing him. So what if they have this so-called "great" education system that indoctrinates young Cubans to become good little Commies? So what if they have a great healthcare system?
Cuba has been richly documented by Amnesty as imprisoning journalists and political dissidents for ridiculous lengths of time. I hope that would never happen here! I am no fan of Castro at all, and I'd rather live here where I can say snotty things if I want (apparently... I want). But everytime I hear about human rights, I also think about how many people we kill and imprison. Here's how many of our citizens we've executed by year since 1976 (total of 869), just for what it's worth. Also, our prison population has increased from about 320,000 in 1980 to 1.36 million in 2002 (US Dept. of Justice statistics). There are well over 6 million people in some form of criminal punishment (parole, probation, jail, or prison). I think that's about 1/50 US citizens, which just sounds crazy. I don't know how Castro compares statistically, but it's probably not drastically worse or better; but then, it's not like he publishes exact statistics like we do. And I doubt that all prisoners there get the right to a trial, as most of ours definitely do. Again, I am very happy here, thank you, and I wouldn't want to live there. But I don't think he's some bloodthirsty monster. As for endangering and killing children with military action, I'm sad to say that Castro is hardly alone on that front.
B-Bob, I like you. I really do. But there is a whale of a difference between what Castro does in imprisoning political opposition and what we do (hint: a large number of those incarcerations are drug related, which is a position our citizenry overall supports). You'll be hard pressed to find where our political leader, Bush, unilaterally decides to imprison someone (like Gore), or have him shot. You'll be hard pressed to find someone who WANTS TO LEAVE the country (US) being put in prison. Apples and oranges buddy, apples and oranges.
Bama, thanks for the links. I don't want to criticize based on their politics, but I do feel like I need to be wary reading articles by nocastro.com and cubacenter.org ("Center for a Free Cuba"). I'm trying to take it for what it is worth. The nocastro article is written by the WSJ, which I trust, but the case made in the article is not very damning. Finally, I'd point out that I never accused Batista Cuba of being poor or backward; I accused it of being exploitative, corrupt and oppressive. Thanks especially for the tugboat article. It's not exactly a MiG firing missiles at a boat, but it is close if the report was accurate. All that to say this: I don't want to say Castro is perfect. You'll be able to find plenty of examples of him oppressing people and even killing them if you look (and I'll try to not compare them to American atrocities committed in the same period -- that is, after this one reference). What I am saying is that, in sum, Castro has always been motivated by a love of Cuba and that Cuba is better for having had him. They may have been even better off if Castro had a heart-attack in 1995, but they definitely should be glad for the revolution. I don't always appreciate Castro's methods, but I do appreciate his legacy and his commitment. B-Bob, Cuba reportedly has 50 prisoners on death row but has had an unofficial moratorium on executions for several years, so no one has been executed for awhile, including the 3 ferry hijackers. I didn't run across anything about incarceration rates in Cuba.
Oh, I agree almost completely. Again, trials, actual crimes, etc. I wanna live here, and Castro is creepy, and we have a pretty damned good system (not perfect). I probably should have started another thread because I'm interested in our prison industry and the why/how involved in our locking up so many damned people. But then I didn't want to start all that "anti-US" chanting again. At some level though, is the bare number of % of population in prison interesting as a topic? Maybe not, because, as you say, the circumstances can be so completely different. For one, I've always believed that capitalism will necessarily generate more crime than other systems. If the goal is to take what you have to generate more via almost any means necessary, then that seems to send a message. (And no, usual suspects, I'm not bashing capitalism. I think it has a lot to offer and it fits humanity like a glove in some ways. But I do see crime as a byproduct). And Hayes, shucks, I like you too. Strictly in the lets-chew-some-tobaccy-together-and-not-make-eye-contact sort of way though.
We can romanticize the Cuban ideals and list out statistics about education and health care all we want, yet we'll rarely see a boat leave Miami for Havana under the cover of night. I've yet to visit, but have many friends who have. They all agree the living standard is very poor. Some, or much, of that, of course has to do with the US embargo. I can admire Castro for standing up for Cuba, and certainly, compared to Batista, Castro is a saint. You do have to commend him for standing up to a power as strong and influential as the US for so long -- even if you believe that stance was misguided. Because the Cuban economy has been so devastated by US embargos, we'll never truly know how visionary and effective Castro could have been -- if at all. I think we have to concede he's done an admiral job of keeping Cuba independent and relatively advanced given the US embargo. I'm not sure of many other leaders who could have maintained order in those circumstances. He's also held true to many of his socialist ideals. Absolute power, of course, usually has its pitfalls. I'd rather face the US justice system than that of Cuba (though not particularly keen to test that one (or any other) either...). Is it better to be in the US? Of course it is. But we have to remember that many of Cuba's problems are a result of the economic embargo.
so would you compare castro to a more benign version of mao? mao stood up for china and kicked chiang out as well as many other things that consolidated chinese power. i really don't know is this an apt comparison for castro or is mao far worse than castro?
No, I wouldn't say they were very comparable really. In my view, Mao was a communist first and Chinese second. I do think he loved his country and countrymen, but loved the revolution more. That is very dangerous, imo. Castro has always seemed to me to be a man who loved Cuba and he did what he could for what he thought was its best welfare. If the Americans had been supportive of the revolution, Cuba may not have been nearly so communist (though still socialist). Of course, you can't really tell what might have been. Plus, Mao in particular and China in general had a calamitous history that forced a certain callousness on them that Castro was fortunate not to have. As I had said, I have a special interest in communist usurpers. Not all of them (or even many) were nice guys. But they're all important figures in shaping the world. I think it is important to take a good look at what they were doing and why they were doing it instead of just writing them off as butchers.
Because the Cuban economy has been so devastated by US embargos, we'll never truly know how visionary and effective Castro could have been -- if at all. FROM BNB That is an out right lie the embargo is nothing more then symbolic N.A.F.T.A proves it. Canada and Mexico are strong trading partners with Cuba. Cuba can buy any American goods they want from those two countries and we can buy goods from Cuba though those two countries The problem is there is no market economy no ability to start your own business without Castro his government has a history of seizing foreign assets so not many banks will work with him the facts are most Americans want to trade with Cuba it is the Cuban Americans that support the embargo if we lifted the embargo tomorrow their would be riots in the streets of Miami Castro has 95% of the blame for Cuba's economy. Until Castro moves his economy to capitalism the Cuban people will suffer
The last three words "if at all" were an important part of my post. I was also not arguing for or against the embargos. The embargo is, however, more than symbolic. How many Cuban products are available in the US. Can you legally buy a Cuban cigar in Houston? Tourism is a huge industry for most Caribbean nations, yet Cuba is cut-off from its closest and largest market. It's difficult to move the economy to Capitalism when you're cut off from your market. Using other nations as intermediaries is not efficient, or always practical. I'm not suggesting Cuba is better for it (it isn't), but I don't think it’s correct to evaluate Castro or the Cuban economy without acknowledging the very real effect of the trade embargo. I'll be quick to agree to any criticism you have on his human rights record.
I am sure that once Fidel kicks the bucket there will be a major change in Cuba and we will support it full force. I want Casinos there baby.....the new Vegas. DD
Casinos are there and waiting...It won't be long. I expect the borders will open before Fidel passes on...and the Euros and Canucks will have to share the beach with all you Yanks.
It's difficult to move the economy to Capitalism when you're cut off from your market. Using other nations as intermediaries is not efficient, or always practical. Cuba still has a lot of markets including the E. U. China Japan to go to plus Castro's government is wrong you can't argue that. The Cuban people like all people in the world should run the government not the other way around. the Cuban people have no say in Castro's government. Well, we have tried to nagosate a way to reopan the cuban markets. Castro shot us down as well as Cuban Americans. Casto can Open our markets by having free elections and giving his people the right to speak, and have a choice in life. He is a totalitarian dictator he is not a commie in the sense of Marx or Lennon. he thinks he and his ideas are more important then the Cuban people like Mao, Paul pot, and Stalin in their mind their opinions are more important then their people.
Why the US fears Cuba Hostility to the Castro regime doesn't stem from its failings, but from its achievements Seumas Milne Thursday July 31, 2003 The Guardian Fifty years after Fidel Castro and his followers launched the Cuban revolution with an abortive attack on the dictator Batista's Moncada barracks, Cuba's critics are already writing its obituaries. Echoing President Bush's dismissal of Cuban-style socialism as a "relic", the Miami Herald pronounced the revolution "dead in the water" at the weekend. The Telegraph called the island "the lost cause that is Cuba", while the Independent on Sunday thought the Cuban dream "as old and fatigued as Fidel himself" and a BBC reporter claimed that, by embracing tourism, "the revolution has simply replaced one elite with another". Bush is, of course, only the latest of 10 successive US presidents who have openly sought to overthrow the Cuban government and Batista's heirs in Florida have long plotted a triumphant return to reclaim their farms, factories and bordellos - closed or expropriated by Castro, Che Guevara and their supporters after they came to power in 1959. But international hostility towards the Cuban regime has increased sharply since April, when it launched its harshest crackdown on the US-backed opposition for decades, handing out long jail sentences to 75 activists for accepting money from a foreign power and executing three ferry hijackers. The repression, which followed 18 months of heightened tension between the US and Cuba, shocked many supporters of Cuba around the world and left the Castro regime more isolated than it has been since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Egged on by Britain and the rightwing governments of Italy and Spain, the EU has now used the jailings to reverse its policy of constructive engagement and fall in behind the US neo-conservative line, imposing diplomatic sanctions, increasing support for the opposition and blocking a new trade agreement. But it's not hard to discover the origins of this dangerous standoff, which follows a period in which Amnesty International had noted Cuba's "more open and permissive approach" towards dissent. In the aftermath of September 11, the Bush administration - whose election depended on the votes of hardline Cuban exiles in Florida - singled out Cuba for membership of a second-tier axis of evil. The Caribbean island, US under-secretary of state John Bolton insisted menacingly, was a safe haven for terrorists, was researching biological weapons and had dual-use technology it could pass to other "rogue states". He was backed by Bush, who declared that the 40-year-old US trade embargo against Cuba would not be lifted until there were both multi-party elections and free market reforms, while Cuba was branded a threat to US security, overturning the Clinton administration's assessment. Into this growing confrontation stepped James Cason as the new chief US diplomat in Havana, with a brief to boost support for Cuba's opposition groups. The US's huge quasi-embassy mainly provided equipment and facilities, but millions of dollars of US government aid also appears to have been channelled to the dissidents through Miami-based exile groups. The final trigger for Castro's clampdown was a string of US-indulged plane and ferry hijackings in April, against a background of US warnings about the threat to its security and Cuban fears of military intervention in the event of a mass exodus from Cuba - a scenario long favoured by Miami exiles. Some have concluded that a paranoid Castro walked into a trap laid by Bush. After 44 years of economic siege, mercenary invasion, assassination attempts, terrorist attacks and biological warfare from their northern neighbour, it might be thought the Cuban leadership had some reason to feel paranoid. But perhaps significantly, the US has in the past few weeks adopted a more cooperative stance, returning 15 hijackers to Cuba and warning Cubans that they should only come to the US through "existing legal channels", which allow around 20,000 visas a year. And however grim the Cuban crackdown, it beggars belief that the denunciations have been led by the US and its closest European allies in the "war on terror". Not only has the US sentenced five Cubans to between 15 years and life for trying to track anti-Cuban, Miami-based terrorist groups and carried out over 70 executions of its own in the past year, but (along with Britain) supports other states, in the Middle East and Central Asia for example, which have thousands of political prisoners and carry out routine torture and executions. And, of course, the worst human rights abuses on the island of Cuba are not carried under Castro's aegis at all, but in the Guantanamo base occupied against Cuba's will, where the US has interned 600 prisoners without charge for 18 months, who it now plans to try in secret and possibly execute - without even the legal rights afforded to Cuba's jailed oppositionists. Which only goes to reinforce what has long been obvious: that US hostility to Cuba does not stem from the regime's human rights failings, but its social and political successes and the challenge its unyielding independence offers to other US and western satellite states. Saddled with a siege economy and a wartime political culture for more than 40 years, Cuba has achieved first world health and education standards in a third world country, its infant mortality and literacy rates now rivalling or outstripping those of the US, its class sizes a third smaller than in Britain - while next door, in the US-backed "democracy" of Haiti, half the population is unable to read and infant mortality is over 10 times higher. Those, too, are human rights, recognised by the UN declaration and European convention. Despite the catastrophic withdrawal of Soviet support more than a decade ago and the social damage wrought by dollarisation and mass tourism, Cuba has developed biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries acknowledged by the US to be the most advanced in Latin America. Meanwhile, it has sent 50,000 doctors to work for free in 93 third world countries (currently there are 1,000 working in Venezuela's slums) and given a free university education to 1,000 third world students a year. How much of that would survive a takeover by the Miami-backed opposition? The historical importance of Cuba's struggle for social justice and sovereignty and its creative social mobilisation will continue to echo beyond its time and place: from the self-sacrificing internationalism of Che to the crucial role played by Cuban troops in bringing an end to apartheid through the defeat of South Africa at Cuito Cuanavale in Angola in 1988. But those relying on the death of Castro (the "biological solution") to restore Cuba swiftly to its traditional proprietors may be disappointed, while the Iraq imbroglio may have checked the US neo-conservatives' enthusiasm for military intervention against a far more popular regime in Cuba. That suggests Cuba will have to expect yet more destabilisation, further complicating the defence of the social and political gains of the revolution in the years to come. The greatest contribution those genuinely concerned about human rights and democracy in Cuba can make is to help get the US and its European friends off the Cubans' backs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/cuba/story/0,11983,1009473,00.html
