Re: Please draw your inferences more carefully.

Post #6,444 by addison 8/23/01 11:35:59 AM Reply	Re: Please draw your inferences more carefully. I didn't call Helms-Burton an "arbitrary, stupid law" in my post. I didn't express any opinion about it, but rather gave a too brief summary of my understanding of what it was. I said he was "a thorn in the side of those attempting to have a reasonable foreign policy, IMHO." Which would indicate to me that you don't find it "reasonable". Sorry if you didn't like that inference, I still get the same one. But I'll agree you didn't use those words (I was talking about more than just you, and using yours as an example). My apologies for any misunderstanding. Castro will remain in power as long as he is alive and has enough popular support. The damage Cuban economy suffers under the US embargo has little to do with that - and may in fact help increase his support. The embargo, as structured now, is counter-productive, IMO. Those are 2 seperate issues. "Popular support" won't change, if there's not a reason to. (And getting shot for disagreeing/critizing Castro is a good reason not to make waves). The embargo might very well be counter-productive. I can't say that its not. But I'm not sure lifting it helps the Cuban people. Lifting it, allowing the money Cuba needs to keep things afloat in - that won't decrease Castro's support, it will increase it, and give Castro that much more control over the doling out of it, and where it goes. I can see that as a possibility. Quite likely, anyway. Trying to craft a plan that wouldn't increase Castro's power is difficult. Helms-Burton has certainly hurt Castro's power base (the popular support you mentioned). There's a presumption in dealing with Cuba, that as soon as Castro is gone, the problem is solved. And I don't know why that is. (the Cuban exiles are really bad about it). Nothing shows me that magically Cuba will change into a democratic Shangri-La. Predicating everything on Castro is a mistake, IMO. I presume that someone will take over the dictatorial reins when he steps down/dies. (Don't forget, Cuba has never been a democracy) Perhaps someone without the Charisma, and needing even more ruthless measures to keep "popular support?" I'm not certain as to the best way to deal with that. If there could be honest negotiation with Cuba, and open the barriers, I'd agree with you. But Cuba isn't allowing outside investment that will destabilize, or cause disruption, but that reinforces the government control. So I'm still undecided on Helms-Burton, and the Embargo.... and not sure that its "unreasonable". Addison
Post #6,548 by boxley 8/23/01 8:53:42 PM Reply	Agree about after Castro It will not change overnite and all the exiles will do is piss off the people who stayed if they go bull headed and rush over to take charge. The revolution has been there for 40 yrs it will change but not overnight except by extreme violence. I really hope that doesnt happen. That is why in my opinion we have to make nice with castro now before he dies so any new leader will have one less piece of outside issues to blame. thanx, bill Our bureaucracy and our laws have turned the world into a clean, safe work camp. We are raising a nation of slaves. Chuck Palahniuk
Post #6,792 by CRConrad 8/27/01 11:38:11 AM Reply	Wrong. Addison writes: If there could be honest negotiation with Cuba, and open the barriers, I'd agree with you. But Cuba isn't allowing outside investment that will destabilize, or cause disruption, but that reinforces the government control. Yes, Cuba is too allowing outside investment! That's what the Helms-Burton Act is all about, remember? Penalizing third-country companies, or third-countries as a whole for all I know, for... wait for it... yes, exactly: Investing in Cuba. From what I hear, most of their economy runs on foreign currencies from the "Intourist"-style "special economic zones" (i.e, the grounds around big European- (and Japanese-, etc?) -owned hotel complexes) already. Which, ironically, would again seem to be turning Cubans into a people of busboys, waiters, pimps and hookers to "the white man"... Sure, that may be what some old Americans, and a lot of those idiotic kid-napper wannabe "exile Cubans" (i.e, Hispanic-descended South Floridians) want -- but they better hope the inevitable resentment be directed specifically at the "new Elite" Europeans, then. Personally, I believe they won't be so bloody petit-maitre about the details, but let you Merkins taste a good share of their frustration at this neo-colonolialism, too. (Which would be doubly ironic, seeing as how, thanks to the Helms-Burton Act, you're innocent this time around -- for once!) So you better hope American money gets in there pretty fast after Fidel puts away the spoon for good, and that they do it more humbly than the Big Eurobucks are doing right now, so as to help defuse such tensions. And won't that (Merkin Capital having to be -- or at least act -- more humble than us YourPeons, that is) be triply ironic? Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #6,794 by a6l6e6x 8/27/01 11:47:15 AM Reply	Re: Wrong. You may or maybe not be aware of a very large flow of US dollars from Cuban Americans to their relatives in Cuba. Ironically, that's one of the things "propping up" Fidel. Alex Life is a comedy for those who think and a tragedy for those who feel. -- Anne Frank
Post #6,796 by pwhysall 8/27/01 11:56:47 AM Reply	CRC == GWB? "...frustration at this neo-colonolialism..." Have they ever been seen in the same room? No? I rest my case. :-) -- Peter Shill For Hire
Post #6,802 by addison 8/27/01 12:19:21 PM Reply	No, CRC. And you even quoted the important disclaimer. *But Cuba isn't allowing outside investment that will destabilize, or cause disruption, but that reinforces the government control.* Yes, Cuba is too* allowing outside investment! That's what the Helms-Burton Act is all about, remember?* Read the rest of the sentance. The important part - that would destabilize, or cause disruption. The outside investment that is being allowed is what the government allows - which will increase the governmental control. (Which one of the articles linked to in here referenced, as well). Sure, that may be what some old Americans, and a lot of those idiotic kid-napper wannabe "exile Cubans" (i.e, Hispanic-descended South Floridians) Kidnapper? I'm unaware of any kidnappings in the recent past, other than a couple of kids abducted TO Cuba. If you're referring to the well-noted case of Elian, wasn't kidnapping (by the Cubans in this country). But I suppose that anybody who disagrees with CRC is just an idiot. It was a custody battle, and the correct side won legistlatively, even if it probably wasn't the morally correct thing to do. Addison
Post #6,845 by Ashton 8/27/01 4:09:25 PM Reply	Umm 'not morally correct' to return kid to father? Social engineering for God&Country? Better to be a 3rd-world orphan (albeit Famous Orphan\ufffd) in Murica than, reside with own father? Or did you mean ~ first, have Murican investigators determine the father's past relationship with mother + before + since their separation; examine the interior of his hovel and see if it matches 'moral' standards for the raising of cheeldrun and.. Then! let kid go home? maybe? Are all those cheeldrun somehow surviving in non-Murican-oriented Cuba: also living with immoral parents, say? - parents corrupting their kids by teaching them that Their system is better than Our system? Is than enough of an offense to make it: an 'immoral' act - to send a kid to such a place? Izzat where you're heading? Sheesh, Addison - when ya sprinkle in blab-words like Freedom, Truth and er moral, the flood-gates are open for any personal cockamamie religious, areligious, fascist or Repo definition of moral. Doesn't this make it now a pretty useless word? - at least where, something other than visceral emotional - response is sought, that is (?) Ashton

Welcome to IWETHEY!