Cuba

hey this is for a show i was watching i never said it made sense

i was jus tthrowing something in there for debate

 

Cuba is a dictatorship, Anton, and always has been. Castro does not share power with anyone. And you might find a rather large number of people in Cuba hate him, especially the families of those he has imprisoned for political "crimes". He controls the Cuban media, which means that the only things you will hear from them about conditions in Cuba are good. The truth is, the Cuban economy is in the sewer, because there is no longer a constant flow of money coming into Cuba from the Soviet Union and Castro flatly refuses to make any kind of economic reforms on the grounds that doing so would compromise the revolution, whatever that is supposed to mean. And before you throw around blanket condemnations of Americans because of some bad things that our government has done in the past, I would remind you that not only do many Americans (myself included) despise the right wing dictatorial regimes the government has supported, but we have offered asylum to many of the victims of those governments. More to the point, whenever there is a natural disaster of the aftermath of a war or other calamity, it is always the United States which takes the lead in bringing aid and relief to the stricken areas. Most nations in such straits automatically request such assistance from us, in fact, for which I don't blame them a bit. Maybe you should try coming over to America and getting to know us personally, Anton; that might open your eyes in ways you could not imagine. Because you might find out that we're not the horrific fiends you seem to assume we are. And I have a hunch that you have never met any Americans, or even tried to.

 

The reason that I condem the us lays in the fact that the us sanctions on cuba cause much trouble. If a company trades with cuba it comes on a black list. The company won't be allowed to trade with the us and faces harsh punishment like; entering of their ships or cargo in international waters by us navy. Also bank deposits will be seized.
So companies with global interest think twice before investing or trading with the us and these global companies are the largest investors.

You assume I've never met americans or ever speak to a american. On the contrary, as security officers I've worked at american firms with american personell, besides the father of a friend of mine is senior officer at the us base Ramstein. Occasionally american officers visit him at home and so we have some conversations.

Look, I do not consider you as person responsable for the policy of your government. I know that the us election system is frauduleus and that it is possible to influence elections by declaring registered voters as not valid.
So in fact it could be that you haven't vote for the government. But again it is not personal.

I ask you to be coherent: if you say that cuba is a dictatorship (what it is) please judge with the same standards your own government.

 

The United States government a dictatorship? I'd love to know just how you came up with that. Dictatorships do not have presidential elections every four years, Anton. And even when dictators hold what they call "elections", they are not voted out of office. You say that the US election system is "fraudulent" (and that is the correct term, BTW); on what evidence do you base this? The Electoral College does indeed decide who gets elected, to the annoyance of quite a few; however, it is seen as necessary in order to balance the popular vote. Were the Electoral College eliminated, it is feared, heavily populated states like California, New York, Texas, Michigan, etc. would dominate the elections just by the sheer number of people who live in them. Our system of government is composed of checks and balances, in order to prevent one person or group of persons from gaining too much power; it may not be perfect (and it definitely isn't), but it is a long way from being a dictatorship. And just what group of registered voters have had their votes declared "invalid", and when?

I grant that you have met some Americans, Anton, but you have evidently not visited this country. You need to do so, and actually *learn* about us first hand.

 

Did you guys see the anti-us protest march castro just held? it was to protest the american sanctions. i find it really funny b/c he blames the us when he is the cause of most ofl the problems in cuba (including being the main reason for the sanctions). maybe if he'd just die or step down, then cuba could become prosperous.

 

No reaction about the sanctions, I suppose you all really have no idea what these sanctions are.

Use the same standards, not necessarily the same terms. It´s simple, the candidate with the most money and the largest network wins the election.
Bush did it through his brother in Florida by dismissing 58000 registred voters on the grounds of criminal behaviour and so on. All these voters were picked out because they voted democrats. 90% was illegally dismissed. So bush won with 500 votes and is Democratic elected, yeah right! Castro uses other method`s with the same result. Why is he suddenly an evil dictator while bush basicly does the same? In cuba voters have no choice but are still allowed to vote, in america voters who oppose the powerful candidate are prohibited to vote. And america´s election system is better then cuba´s? I really regard you smarter corps.

 

Anton where do you get these stats, direct from the Ministry of Truth? The review conducted by the Miami Herald after the 2000 election concluded that Bush had won in Florida fair and square. Look I don't like Bush either, but I think your incredibly anti-American outlook makes you likely to believe any drivel posted out there and disregard anything favorable to the U.S.
I do think the U.S. election system is infinitely better than Cuba's. To compare the U.S. system to Cuba's is beyond reason. I would thought you had a more critical thought process going

 

After reading the very well argumented replies I now realize how foolish it is of me to criticise the us. Now I understand the great value of torturing and killing. Hyprocitical lying and messing with evidence are also good things to do. Sanctions are not intended to harm civilions but to weaken the thugs, oh yes I forgot.
Oh how ignorant are we europeans, talking about human rights. Ofcourse it is better to shoot and then ask. Or to impose sanctions that will only harmcivilions. Surely the usa brings only prosperity. The us doesn't commit warcrimes they only " correct" other thinking people by intimidate or punish them. "It is to educate them"

Criticism will not be allowed because by critic you endanger the good cause. When you endanger the good cause you are automaticly anti-american and that means you are a terrorist and when you are a terrorist we can and will exterminate you with pleasure.

Yes, USA land of opportunities and........ liberties?


Those who are ignorant are not to blame. Those who wish to be ignorant are to blame.

What kind of discussion can we have when you repeat your government arguments? when you just don't react on other arguments? when you just don"t want to know the other side?

Think for yourself

 

Anton,

You might want to heed your own advice. Open your mind a little bit and accept the possibility that the U.S. is not the Third Reich incarnate.

 

Thank you canambridge for the support.
Anton, I don't know what to tell you except to look at some better facts.

 

Look it is very simple,

1 not one of you have reacted on my arguments, instead you all begin about my anti-americanism
2 by not reacting on arguments but on feeling of patriotism you totally miss the point
3 wich one of you knows what the us sanctions really are or cause?
no one because you can't react properly to it.
4 this is exactly why the rest of the world doesn't like you, you have no self criticism nor are you able to even listen!

Like I said before, none of you seems to have the intention to discuss freely. You start accusing me of having prejudice and anti american feelings. Very weak to run away for good arguments.

But who cares right? Why oh why does the world have a problem with you attitude?

 

Just to add a stir -

Cuba was America's friend.
Castro was America's friend.

Then Castro decided he'd be better off siding with the USSR.
Cuba was not America's friend.
Castro was not America's friend.

Did his style / method of government change?
Nope.

(don't worry guys, England has made mistakes too - I just can't resist...)

 

Anton, every recount the American media has done (and there have been several) not only confirmed Bush's victory, but the margin of his victory increased each time. You say that 58,000 registered voters were dismissed for being convicted felons or for other reasons, then state that this was done illegally in 90% of the cases. What is your source for this information? Only by knowing this can the accuracy of your statement be assessed by the rest of us. And I can tell you that when the major television networks told people that the polls in Florida had closed when, in fact, they were still open, and would be for another two hours, that cost Mr. Bush at least 8,000 votes (that is the estimate given out by the Democratic Party; the Republicans say it was more like 12,000). Then there was the attempt by the Democrats to prevent the mail in ballots of American military personnel overseas from being counted. So it would seem that, yes, Mr. Bush WAS democratically elected to office! Fidel Castro has never faced any opposition in ANY of the so-called "elections" he has held. You keep giving us a lot of rhetoric and opinon, Anton, which you evidently expect the rest of us to just accept at face value, without any corroborating evidence, then get mad when we decline to do so. My source for the information I have given above is the American media, BTW, which has poured so much time and effort into the 2000 election.

 

Anton, provide some arguments and I'm sure those south of the border will respond and maybe I will as well. Chariot of the Gods is full of "facts" as well. Why are your (un-named) sources to be accepted as correct, yet you dismiss any any argument as U.S. propoganda. I wouldn't run away even if you did have a good argument. As they say, arguing with an enigeer is a lot like wrestling with a pig in mud. After a couple of days you realize the pig likes it!

 

It seems my english is not understandable for you so here a link to a flash about the subject.

www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Oh yes, the creator of the flash is anti-bush so you can spit around!

 

Anton, you say that America has no self-criticism. I beg to differ. I know (as most americans do) that there are areas in which America needs to improve. But there is a difference in looking at that and trying to improve it, and attacking America as evil. Every country has problems. Right now I agree with most of what President Bush is doing. And the things I disagree with Pres. Bush would be things that you would agree with him on. Is it wrong to be patriotic? You act like it is some preprogrammed defense mechanism.
Well those are my thoughts.

 

Sounds like something that freak Micheal Moore would like (the guy who got booed off the stage at the academy awards for saying, "shame on you, president bush."). That's about as far as he got.
I still don't think that's a hard source though. Anyone could make up figures and put them in a cool little video. Do you have any hard statistics?

 

Have you seen Micheal Moore's documentatry's? They reveal disturbing things about Americans. Personally, he can say whatever he wants on stage after filming "Bowling for Columbine." And he wasn't booed off the stage, one guy booed.

 

Anton,
I followed the links you provided. First it says nothing about the 58,000 being removed because they were Democrats. It says that DBT produced a list of 8,000 ex-felons, who cannot legally vote, to be removed from the voting rolls. It then says "But Harris wanted more" and implies that anyone with the same birthday and surname as 8,000 ex-felons was removed from the voting lists. Second it doesn't say 90% were illegally dimissed. It says DBT admitted to an error rate of 15%, or 8,700 voters and then it makes an unsubstantiated claim that independant reviewers had determined that the DBT list was 95% in error (the BBC link says the one county that checked all the names from their county found it 95% wrong), and claims that this means 55,100 were "illegally" removed from the voting lists and implies that these voters would have voted for Gore. The BBC transcript says 22,000 were Democrats, so were the other 33,100 Republicans who would have voted for Bush?
We don't use this kind of internet trash when we're debating the merits of WWII tanks. I'm still looking for your carefully reasoned and supported arguments. And stop making me defend Bush, it's not something I enjoy.

 

Well, you ask me to provide sources. Now I have checked one of yours, Miami Herald. It is said that this paper is owned by one of the companies that contributed to bush's election funds.

Maybe the flash I linked isn't hard evidence, is the Miami Herald hard evidence?

I doubt it.