When are we going to lift sanctions on Cuba?

[PsychoAndy]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

well you have at least one thing wrong: only 1 U2 has ever been shot down, and that was when gary powers flew a straight course over the USSR.

October 27, 1962--Around 12:00 noon: A U-2 reconnaissance plane is shot down over Cuba and its pilot, Major Rudolf Anderson, killed. Anderson had flown one of the first U-2 missions responsible for detecting the Soviet missiles.
Link

 

[Scipionix]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Tiawan and Tibet have both been part of China long before the 20th or 21st century. All China's claims to date have been for land that used to be part of the empire and is occupied by people that are ethnicly <sp> chinese.

Tibet was not ethnically Chinese until the Communists started transplanting them there in the 1950s to overwhelm Tibetan identity and culture.

Taiwan was not under Chinese control until about 1700, which is recent by their standards. Even then it was a backwater province, sparsely populated, with non-Mandarin speakers. It only really became fully "Chinese" when the Kuomintang fled there in 1949. They and their descendents are the vast majority of the population there. The PRC's claim to Taiwan is dubious at best.

 

[ElFenix]

I don't think you know the limits that Truman went to in an attempt to stop stalin. We drew a line, we spent 400billion dollars in 60's (I believe that translates to over a trillion dollars today after inflation) on the marshal plan to rebuild western europe.

try 5 billion in 1947...



the monroe doctrine was nothing for much of its existence, it was enforced by the british navy.

 

[rahvin]

In any case, its a ridiculous policy. If argentina and south africa wanted to trade fruit, can the US threaten them with war? According to their policy, they should. But the fact is that the US has no rights interfering in the relations of two soveriegn countries, whether they're trading fruit or missiles, its their problem.

You misunderstand the monroe Doctrine. Trading fruit is not a political move designed to influence politics in the western hemisphere. Nukes in cuba are. The monore doctrine was a response to european nations trying to influence other nations in the western hemisphere to act on their behalf against american interests. Monroe said: you won't interfere and use the natives against us anymore or we will go to war with you. Although from the time it was enacted until now it has rarely been used it has always been american policy that no outside power will use another nation in the western hemisphere against us.

As far as my numbers being off, ya I realize that now. I believe it was 5 billion in 49 which equates to nearly 500billion today (after inflation), this would be close to 25% of current federal expenditures today. I think they spent 250 million stoping the commies in greece and turkey. What's a power of 10 between friends. 😉

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: PsychoAndy

Originally posted by: ElFenix

well you have at least one thing wrong: only 1 U2 has ever been shot down, and that was when gary powers flew a straight course over the USSR.

October 27, 1962--Around 12:00 noon: A U-2 reconnaissance plane is shot down over Cuba and its pilot, Major Rudolf Anderson, killed. Anderson had flown one of the first U-2 missions responsible for detecting the Soviet missiles.
Link

holy crap! no one ever talks about that!

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

This statement seems to imply that the U.S. OWES island nations tourism as a right.

No, it doesn't imply that.

Then what are you trying to say? Because your statement (rightly) blames the U.S. government for not allowing U.S. citizens to spend money in Cuba, but goes on to say that this is a "childish" thing to do. In what way is this childish?

And no, the China argument does not apply. Two wrongs don't make a right.

yes it does, in fact its very important. It shows how the US is willing to forget about communism, human rights etc when lots of money is at stake. I can't blame them, its a good decision, but I get irritated when people use the communism and human rights argument with Cuba.[/quote]

Ok, here you're saying that the China argument does apply, because Two wrongs DO make a right. I completely disagree. Two wrongs NEVER make a right. Three lefts, yes. Two wrongs, no.

However, if you're saying that people who justify sanctioning Cuba because of its communist and human rights record, but also support free trade with China, are hypocrites, then I can see what you mean.

Of course, that doesn't take into account that China and Cuba are IMO very different cases. In China, you have an ingrained regime that ain't gonna go away if the head honcho dies. In Cuba, I suspect that once Fidel dies, there will be another revolution that overthrows their current government. But this will only occur if the common people of Cuba are unhappy enough.

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

The US has had a stated policy since the 1800's that NO foreign power from across the atlantic can interfere in the business of the western hemisphere.

But the USSR was the superpower from across the pacific 😉

In any case, its a ridiculous policy. If argentina and south africa wanted to trade fruit, can the US threaten them with war? According to their policy, they should. But the fact is that the US has no rights interfering in the relations of two soveriegn countries, whether they're trading fruit or missiles, its their problem.

According to this logic, the U.S. should have let Hitler, Hirohito, and Mussolini take over Europe, North Africa, the Soviet Union, and the rest of the world and not interfered in any way in the relations of two (or more) sovereign countries.

And I think you're really missing the point. Nuclear missiles pointed at your country's soil is your country's problem, regardless of who you are, who is doing the pointing and where they are located. U.S. missiles pointed at the Soviet Union were the Soviet Union's problem. U.S. missiles pointed at China are China's problem. Cuban missiles pointed at the U.S. are...