Cuba? (2 Viewers)

[nogoodname]

Why do we hate cuba? I havent heard of them doing anything wronge yet anyways lol why are we still emobring them instead of opening them to be a ally? Just cause they are communist?

 

[jfuh]

Why do we hate cuba? I havent heard of them doing anything wronge yet anyways lol why are we still emobring them instead of opening them to be a ally? Just cause they are communist?

Yep. That and they don't follow our orders. Just the same way that Venezuella is being singled out now as well.

 

[nogoodname]

Yep. That and they don't follow our orders. Just the same way that Venezuella is being singled out now as well.

thats stupid.

 

[RadioBoy]

Why do we hate cuba? I havent heard of them doing anything wronge yet anyways lol why are we still emobring them instead of opening them to be a ally? Just cause they are communist?

There are several reasons why we our relationship with Cuba is rather sour. I'll set up a list.

1) Their role in the Cold War; remember the Cuban missle crisis? It kind of sent any good impression of them to hell.

2) Fidel Castro. The man is just not fit to rule. Between the execution of his political opponents, his ban on religion, his role in the Mariel Boatlift, and his policy on torture... he's just bloodthirsty man. It's what you would expect from a guerilla fighter and revolutionary.

3) Communism. The problem with Communism is that it basically gives the government complete control of the economy... thus making the people slaves to what the government says. Whatever the government says your dollar is worth, that's what it's worth... it's not backed by trust. It makes it impossible for you to live beyond your country of origin, as your currency is only worth paper/metal/whatever anywhere else.

Cuba itself isn't a bad country; they're actually quite civilized and advanced for a Latin-American country. The main problem is Mr. Castro, and his continued infringement on basic human rights.

But as far our relationship with Cuba... I'm willing to say it's gotten much better in the past decade. I mean, moving from open hostility to a sort of uneasiness is quite an improvement, compared to where we were.

 

[Red_Dave]

There are several reasons why we our relationship with Cuba is rather sour. I'll set up a list.

1) Their role in the Cold War; remember the Cuban missle crisis? It kind of sent any good impression of them to hell.

2) Fidel Castro. The man is just not fit to rule. Between the execution of his political opponents, his ban on religion, his role in the Mariel Boatlift, and his policy on torture... he's just bloodthirsty man. It's what you would expect from a guerilla fighter and revolutionary.

3) Communism. The problem with Communism is that it basically gives the government complete control of the economy... thus making the people slaves to what the government says. Whatever the government says your dollar is worth, that's what it's worth... it's not backed by trust. It makes it impossible for you to live beyond your country of origin, as your currency is only worth paper/metal/whatever anywhere else.

Cuba itself isn't a bad country; they're actually quite civilized and advanced for a Latin-American country. The main problem is Mr. Castro, and his continued infringement on basic human rights.

But as far our relationship with Cuba... I'm willing to say it's gotten much better in the past decade. I mean, moving from open hostility to a sort of uneasiness is quite an improvement, compared to where we were.

Since when has human rights played any major role in how the u.s chooses its allys? The U.S has supported the likes of Saddam Husien and General Pinochet so i doubt a poor human rights record would put the u.s off a potential ally.

Its also unlikely the U.S govt wants a democratic cuba, given the fact they suported castros predecessor batista despite the fact he was in no way democratic. What the us really wants is access to cuban markets.

What ban on religeon? From what i hear theres plenty of churches in cuba still running

 

[nogoodname]

Since when has human rights played any major role in how the u.s chooses its allys? The U.S has supported the likes of Saddam Husien and General Pinochet so i doubt a poor human rights record would put the u.s off a potential ally.

Its also unlikely the U.S govt wants a democratic cuba, given the fact they suported castros predecessor batista despite the fact he was in no way democratic. What the us really wants is access to cuban markets.

What ban on religeon? From what i hear theres plenty of churches in cuba still running

ya my grandma was going to on a mission to build a church their but then she didnt have enough time lol.

 

[LeftyHenry]

There are several reasons why we our relationship with Cuba is rather sour. I'll set up a list.

1) Their role in the Cold War; remember the Cuban missle crisis? It kind of sent any good impression of them to hell.

Fair enough but the cold war is over and the Cuban missile crisis was simply a response to the US embargo.

2) Fidel Castro. The man is just not fit to rule. Between the execution of his political opponents, his ban on religion, his role in the Mariel Boatlift, and his policy on torture... he's just bloodthirsty man. It's what you would expect from a guerilla fighter and revolutionary.

I'd take Castro over Batista anyday. Besides I wouldn't tell that to all the families he built shelter for and all the unemployed he provided jobs for. Religion is not banned in cuba. There are many churches that are run normally. In anycase, it's impossible to ban religion because people would practice in secret anyway. Castro's execution of dissidents is greatly exagerated. People have the right to say as they wish and from personal experience and those of my friends, Cubans are very vocal in politics and are often as critical of their government as we are. In anycase, the UN claims that there are 79 prisoners in cuba who are held because of political beliefs. They also claim that there are 25,000 prisoners being held in Afghanistan by the US without charges or access to a lawyer.

... he's just bloodthirsty man. It's what you would expect from a guerilla fighter and revolutionary.

I detest this statement. If that is true then Gerorge Washington and thomas Jefferson and our forefathers are bloodthirsty men as well because they were revolutionaries and guerillas. Revolutionaries are people who want a better change for the future. Who want to liberate there people from opression and poverty and are sick of all the bullshit. Without them we'd be ruled by kings and tyrants.

3) Communism. The problem with Communism is that it basically gives the government complete control of the economy... thus making the people slaves to what the government says. Whatever the government says your dollar is worth, that's what it's worth... it's not backed by trust. It makes it impossible for you to live beyond your country of origin, as your currency is only worth paper/metal/whatever anywhere else.

No not true. You haven't done your homework. Marx wrote that communism is the COMMON ownership of everything and that there can be no true freedom for the working class when there is still a state. Socialism is the PUBLIC ownership. So if you want you could call it a socialism.

Communism does not make you a slave of the government. Communism liberates the working class. It gives the fields to the workers who farm them, the factories to the workers who labor in them, and the mines to the labourers who operate them. With communism you then take the extra coal you mine, clothes you produce, or corn you harvest and give it to the community in exchange, they'll give you everything else that you need to live. This is called the labor theory of value and is the economics of communism.

Cuba itself isn't a bad country; they're actually quite civilized and advanced for a Latin-American country. The main problem is Mr. Castro, and his continued infringement on basic human rights.

Not true. Cuba is a great country with great people who mostly lived in poverty before the Revolution. The revolution created a quality public school system and literally erased illiteracy in a country where it was rampant, Castro paved the roads, brought running water to peoples homes and provided housing for millions without. Cuba also now has world class healthcare better than many 1st world countries could ever dream completely free. The standards of living under Castro have risen astonishingly, especially since they don't have the aid of the richest country in the world. Cuba still has many problems, yet if you compare it to similar nations like Jamaica, panama, and nicaragua, cuba looks like a paradise.

 

[nikibilly]

LeftyHenry,

Im interested to know how free is Cuba, my dad, the next door neighbour and I were having a small debate about this, and he claimed that Cubans cant leave the country, is that true? Why do so many Cuban Americans leave Cuba for Florida? I cant understand if its because they want a better life in a democratic country like America where you arent as restricted as much, but Cuba sounds like a great country, i was watching on Sky News an old report on Cuba and their healthcare system, its brilliant, but much of the country for instance the infrastructure is run down, why dont they repair them to a reasonable level?

There are some views that i cant agree with, like Cuban amateur boxers not being able to turn Professional because the government thinks its too Capitalist.

Look forward to reading your views.

 

[LeftyHenry]

LeftyHenry,

Im interested to know how free is Cuba, my dad, the next door neighbour and I were having a small debate about this, and he claimed that Cubans cant leave the country, is that true? Why do so many Cuban Americans leave Cuba for Florida? I cant understand if its because they want a better life in a democratic country like America where you arent as restricted as much, but Cuba sounds like a great country, i was watching on Sky News an old report on Cuba and their healthcare system, its brilliant, but much of the country for instance the infrastructure is run down, why dont they repair them to a reasonable level?

There are some views that i cant agree with, like Cuban amateur boxers not being able to turn Professional because the government thinks its too Capitalist.

Look forward to reading your views.

Well, it's more complicated than 'cubans can't leave the country'. They are. My father's girlfriend was cuban and she left on a plane with her ex-boyfirend. She visits Cuba with no problem. The thing is that If everyone could afford a plane ticket in any Latin American country you look at everyone would fly straight to America. That's just because America is much wealthier than any one tiny Latin American country could ever dream of being. Oh and by the way, not that many people flee to Florida. Only about 2000 per year flee which is pretty low if you compare it to other Latin American countries. Also those from other Latin countries don't have the legal residence incentive that Cubans do.

Another thing is whether America is really democratic. I don't think it really represents the people. If you look at voter turnouts, onlt 50% of Americans who were voting age showed up to vote in the 2004 election. Even less in congressional and local elections. The duopoly has made it so that anybody who thinks differently is squashed for lack of funds which means they have no way of getting their message out.

I think that a step that could be taken to make America more democratic is make private donations illegal and make it so that every candidate who aquires enough signatures would recieve equal funding. This would make it so that every party has a fair shot. Another step in first world countries like ours would be to abolish congrees and set up a people's internet congress. The people's internet congress would be a government website in which every citizen would have a sort username and password which they'd use to log on to the website. It would be every citizens duty to log on for 5 or 10 or 15 minutes everyday and vote on the issues and problems that face the nation. I think that the internet revolution has made this very possible in the first world where everyone has a computer and internet and if they don't they have a internet cafe in their neighborhood.

As for boxers not being able to become professional, I think that's a myth. When I was in cuba everyone who liked sports were talking about the day's proffesional baseball league games. So I don't think that's true.

 

[nikibilly]

Well, it's more complicated than 'cubans can't leave the country'. They are. My father's girlfriend was cuban and she left on a plane with her ex-boyfirend. She visits Cuba with no problem. The thing is that If everyone could afford a plane ticket in any Latin American country you look at everyone would fly straight to America. That's just because America is much wealthier than any one tiny Latin American country could ever dream of being. Oh and by the way, not that many people flee to Florida. Only about 2000 per year flee which is pretty low if you compare it to other Latin American countries. Also those from other Latin countries don't have the legal residence incentive that Cubans do.

Agreed, but why do some Cubans especially in Florida, USA, hate the Cuban government? I remember seeing footage on SkyNews of Cuban-Amercians waiving flags - must of been Cuban- at the news that Fidel Castro was on his sickness bed.

Another thing is whether America is really democratic. I don't think it really represents the people. If you look at voter turnouts, onlt 50% of Americans who were voting age showed up to vote in the 2004 election. Even less in congressional and local elections. The duopoly has made it so that anybody who thinks differently is squashed for lack of funds which means they have no way of getting their message out.

Again, agreed. Cant really call a country deomocratic when they ban a documentary that openly criticises they president, im referring to Fahrenheit 9/11 by Michael Moore [Source].

...

Another step in first world countries like ours would be to abolish congrees and set up a people's internet congress. The people's internet congress would be a government website in which every citizen would have a sort username and password which they'd use to log on to the website. It would be every citizens duty to log on for 5 or 10 or 15 minutes everyday and vote on the issues and problems that face the nation. I think that the internet revolution has made this very possible in the first world where everyone has a computer and internet and if they don't they have a internet cafe in their neighborhood.

I doutbt the effectiveness of this, and and they may also be security implications. Some people arent interested in politics so if your thinking this should be made manadatory their will be dissent. Wouldnt be applicable in every country especially the poorest countries. Some people also need to be trained how to use computers for instance old aged citizens, their grasp of how to use the interenet and how to navigate through pages and use the computer in general wont be as good as a younger person, again they'll have to be trained, and if they dont have a family member at hand then this would have to be done by the local government.

As for boxers not being able to become professional, I think that's a myth. When I was in cuba everyone who liked sports were talking about the day's proffesional baseball league games. So I don't think that's true.

Im interested in boxing and from what i've read and seen from reliable and well informed sites they arent allowed tho box professional, unless they move out of the country. Thats why you see alot of great amateur boxers in the olmypics never turning pro, case example Mario Kindelan [Gold medalist in the Athens Olympics].

 

[Red_Dave]

Another thing is whether America is really democratic. I don't think it really represents the people. If you look at voter turnouts, onlt 50% of Americans who were voting age showed up to vote in the 2004 election. Even less in congressional and local elections. The duopoly has made it so that anybody who thinks differently is squashed for lack of funds which means they have no way of getting their message out.

I think that a step that could be taken to make America more democratic is make private donations illegal and make it so that every candidate who aquires enough signatures would recieve equal funding. This would make it so that every party has a fair shot. Another step in first world countries like ours would be to abolish congrees and set up a people's internet congress. The people's internet congress would be a government website in which every citizen would have a sort username and password which they'd use to log on to the website. It would be every citizens duty to log on for 5 or 10 or 15 minutes everyday and vote on the issues and problems that face the nation. I think that the internet revolution has made this very possible in the first world where everyone has a computer and internet and if they don't they have a internet cafe in their neighborhood.

Certainly agree with you about the fact alot of "liberal democracys" like the u.s and europe arent as democratic as they claim to be. Noam chomsky said that the democrats and republicans can effectively be regarded as two different factions off the same party and i think that fairly accurate. Likewise over 60% of brittish voters voted for other partys then the one currently in power with an absolute majoirity:roll:

That said im against public funding of political partys because i think its unjust to spend my money fianaceing partys that i disagree with. Alot of people found partys to spread hatred [the bnp and front nationale for example] or just for a joke [see monster raveing loney party] Why should they get my money? Not to mention the fact that alot of campain money is wasted

As for the internet idea thats impractical considering how many issues a legislature deals with at once. These issues require far more thought then a 10 min log in can provide.

I think the gov could do with more referendums but not on every single issue. Countys like switzerland have a system which allows "citizens initiatives" where if the people want to change the law they can collect a petition on it and if it gets enough signatures* the gov has to call a referendum. This leads to around 4 federal referendums each year [along with more at a local level]

Some countrys and parts of the us have a similar system for removeing government ministers [hence all the referendums on hugo chavez].

* I cant remember the exact figure.

 

[Volker]

I think the gov could do with more referendums but not on every single issue. Countys like switzerland have a system which allows "citizens initiatives" where if the people want to change the law they can collect a petition on it and if it gets enough signatures* the gov has to call a referendum. This leads to around 4 federal referendums each year [along with more at a local level]

This is true. They have been testing e-voting since 2003 i Geneva, it worked with internet and SMS, too. Probably they will decide if they use the system in the whole country this year.

 

[Red_Dave]

This is true. They have been testing e-voting since 2003 i Geneva, it worked with internet and SMS, too. Probably they will decide if they use the system in the whole country this year.

Wheres the need for internet and SMS voteing? i was under the impression that they had a very high turnout at referendums and elections anyway. I dont see the point give the huge potential for fraud under that system. Its a hackers dream:roll: Whats stopping people from voteing useing another persons phone?

 

[LeftyHenry]

Wheres the need for internet and SMS voteing? i was under the impression that they had a very high turnout at referendums and elections anyway. I dont see the point give the huge potential for fraud under that system. Its a hackers dream:roll: Whats stopping people from voteing useing another persons phone?

Well, I think that as long as the site would have the strongest security available. I think it would be virtually impossible to hack, and if it was hacked, it would be quickly fixed like when you try to edit a wikipedia page, it's changed within a minute if it's biased or false. Also remember, everyone would have a registered account which makes it so that you can only vote once.

Noam chomsky said that the democrats and republicans can effectively be regarded as two different factions off the same party and i think that fairly accurate.

Yeah I agree with that statement. Chomsky is a smart guy.

That said im against public funding of political partys because i think its unjust to spend my money fianaceing partys that i disagree with. Alot of people found partys to spread hatred [the bnp and front nationale for example] or just for a joke [see monster raveing loney party] Why should they get my money? Not to mention the fact that alot of campain money is wasted

Well obviously you couldn't just start a random party and expect funds. You would get funds once you get a certain amount of signatures depending on the size of the election. Also, the funds would probably come in a voucher form of some so that they could only be spent on campaign-oreintated activities. The point of this is not only does it put all serious parties on level ground, but also it makes campaigning more efficient and money won't be wasted on extravagant things that aren't needed.

As for the internet idea thats impractical considering how many issues a legislature deals with at once. These issues require far more thought then a 10 min log in can provide.

Well, I guess the less important issues would be handled by the senate while issues that effect the people in their day-to-day lives like healthcare, immigration, social security, welfare, and other things that are major would be referendumed. I think what you outlined is good enough and probably more practical now that I think about it.

 

[LeftyHenry]

On the subject of this thread, here are some interesting articles and statistics about Socialism in Cuba.


Democracy in Cuba
Before and After the Revolution
Doctors

Unemployment

Hospitals

 

[Volker]

Wheres the need for internet and SMS voteing? i was under the impression that they had a very high turnout at referendums and elections anyway. I dont see the point give the huge potential for fraud under that system. Its a hackers dream:roll: Whats stopping people from voteing useing another persons phone?

Well, I think that as long as the site would have the strongest security available. I think it would be virtually impossible to hack, and if it was hacked, it would be quickly fixed like when you try to edit a wikipedia page, it's changed within a minute if it's biased or false. Also remember, everyone would have a registered account which makes it so that you can only vote once.

Yes, this answers it pretty good. Let me add, they send a letter to each voter with authentification codes and an identity number which is only valid one time for one voter for one referendum. One difference with e-Banking is the demand for anonymity of the vote.

Absentee ballot happens by letter, too, for a longer time. Both, internet and letter elections have one systematic problem, which applies to cultures with strong family structures. It's possible that the patriach at home votes for the whole family.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Why do we hate cuba? I havent heard of them doing anything wronge yet anyways lol why are we still emobring them instead of opening them to be a ally? Just cause they are communist?

Because Castro is a tyrant who deserves to die for what he has done to the people of Cuba viva alpha 66!!!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Certainly agree with you about the fact alot of "liberal democracys" like the u.s and europe arent as democratic as they claim to be. Noam chomsky said that the democrats and republicans can effectively be regarded as two different factions off the same party and i think that fairly accurate. Likewise over 60% of brittish voters voted for other partys then the one currently in power with an absolute majoirity:roll:

And Noam Chomsky supported Pol Pot and thinks the US got what it deserved on 9-11, Noam Chomsky can suck my dick!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I think, TOT demonstrated it pretty well here for us here.

It's because they are right-wing loosers.

And from what I know, TOT is not a Cuban-American, he only wanted to show us, how they think.

So because I'm opposed to a tyrant who has destroyed Cuba and slaughtered thousand of her people that makes me a loser? Well then ask yourself if you support this man then what does that make you?

And for the record I'm part Cuban, part Irish, part Polish, and all lapsed Catholic lol.

 

[Volker]

I think, TOT demonstrated it pretty well here for us.

It's because they are right-wing loosers.

And from what I know, TOT is not a Cuban-American, he only wanted to show us, how they think.

 

[Volker]

So because I'm opposed to a tyrant who has destroyed Cuba and slaughtered thousand of her people that makes me a loser?

No, I was talking about these organized Cuban-Americans who demonstrated in Miami, when Mr. Castro went to hospital not long ago.

When did he slaughter a thousand people?

Well then ask yourself if you support this man then what does that make you?

This would make me a winner?

And for the record I'm part Cuban, part Irish, part Polish, and all lapsed Catholic lol.

I would have betted about the Irish :mrgreen:

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

No, I was talking about these organized Cuban-Americans who demonstrated in Miami, when Mr. Castro went to hospital not long ago.

Ya and??? Castro is a tyrant who deserves to die and Cuban exiles pray everday for an end to this tyrants reign.

When did he slaughter a thousand people?

I take it you've never heard of Castro's concentration and forced labor camps or the murder of thousands of dissedents in such camps.

This would make me a winner?

Nope quite the opposite actually.

I would have betted about the Irish :mrgreen:

Aye.........

 

[Volker]

I take it you've never heard of Castro's concentration and forced labor camps or the murder of thousands of dissedents in such camps.

Yes, take it this way. I heard of some stories, but not much to consider credible.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Yes, take it this way. I heard of some stories, but not much to consider credible.

Well when you hear first hand accounts from relatives about them I suppose it lends to the credibility.

 

[Volker]

Well when you hear first hand accounts from relatives about them I suppose it lends to the credibility.

It does, however, how can first hand accounts offer statements about numbers?