El primer cumpleaños
Today marks the one year anniversary of one of Cuba's best blogs, Claudia Cadelo's Octavo Cerco. I am taking the liberty of publishing her anniversary post in its entirety, for its beauty, sincerity and its courage:
Cumpleaños
Por Claudia Cadelo
Foto: Claudio Fuentes Madan
Hoy Octavo Cerco cumple un añito y si pudiera poner a la laptop a apagar velitas delante de un pastel lo haría. No sólo he conocido a muchas personas que querré por el resto de mis días, sino que también me he visto en la a veces penosa tarea de escribir sin tener la menor idea de cómo hacerlo. Ahora es como un vicio, un reto y una sensación de libertad que me redime de todas las ataduras y todas las clasificaciones: escribo pero no soy escritora, informo pero no soy periodista, me escabullo por la red pero no soy informática, critico al gobierno pero no tengo partido y digo lo que me da la gana, pero sé que no soy libre.
Hago el balance de estos últimos 12 meses y aunque Ciro dice que los blogs no cumplen años yo creo que sí, mi vida ha dado un giro de 180 grados y tengo que celebrarlo. Pero la libertad es enigmática y mi cobardía, tengo que reconocerlo, no ha girado demasiado. Sigo con las ventanas cerradas, hablando bajito para que no me oigan los extraños y con la misma paranoia de siempre. Sin embargo algo bueno hay, ahora cuando más miedo tengo es cuando más me lanzo, y eso ya es algo.
Por el cumpleaños he recibido un regalo: dos desconocidos en la calle me han parado para hablarme del blog. No puedo expresar la combinación de terror con alegría que sentí, aun no me adapto a la idea de que la gente me vea por la calle y sepa que yo estoy literalmente “metida en candela”, sé que con el tiempo me acostumbraré. Por ahora vivo el momento, mi bitácora es parte de mi vida y como le dije un día a Iván cuando aún no había abierto Desde la Habana: ya verás que es como un hijo, no lo podrás abandonar.
Note: If anyone can help out with a translation, Id' greatly appreciate it.
She's terrific -- discovered her a few months back. She is also gutsy.
Yes. It is a good blog. Didn't she support the Juanes concert?
http://octavocerco.blogspot.com/2009/09/llego-el-dia-del-concierto.html
Adrian,
It's people like you that really tend to piss me off. I can support her blog just like I supported yoani's and completely disagree about any fucking issue I want. And just like she had the right to support the Juanes concert and be vocal about it, I too, have the right to not support the castro ass licking effort and be vocal about it.
One thing I have learned about people like you - is that you spend more time and waste more effort in criticism of those trying to make a difference than in making a difference yourself.
One need only run a search on your blog for certain key terms: Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, Dr. Darsi Ferrer, Damas de Blanco, dissidents, human rights violations to find the trickling - if any at all - of posts dealing with same. There are plenty of shots at Babalu and company, though.
i suspect youd probably never even heard of Claudia blog before, or at least, never gave it any mind until and only until you could link it in a negative light with Juanes, babalu and the cuban exile community.
My God, what an incredible piece of shit you are.
case in point, Adrian:
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=claudia+cadelo
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=oscar+elias+biscet
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=octavo+cerco
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=cuban+dissident
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=darsi+ferrer
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=damas+de+blanco
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=political+prisoners
and of course, the doozie:
http://www.agrandillusion.com/?s=babalu
get the fuck out of here with that holier than though liberal fucking bullshit. You are nothing but a fucking hypocrite and hatemonger, stirring the shit for your own fucking little warped fucking agenda.
Fucking asshole.
And dont come back here with your little fucking hypocritical shit agian, or I will give you yet another public humiliation like I have just done.
So even though nothing I said suggested it you assumed that somehow I'm not doing enough to help or that I had never heard of her blog (something you're completely wrong about). That's psychotic. You've set up a straw man that you can lash out at.
I used to admire the fact that you commented on our blog knowing it was unfriendly waters. Now I've seen you attack two people personally in a way that has nothing to do with either mine or your opinion.
Keep it civil Val.
As opposed to you? Who wants to keep an embargo going that hurts the people of Cuba so you can sit in Miami and smile that "Freedom" is winning.
Adrian,
Now, Im going to insult you.
Are you mentally challenged?
I KNOW YOU DONT DO ANYTHING TO HELP THE SITUATION IN CUBA. Thats the whole point. YOU PREFER TO CRITICIZE THOSE THAT DO DO SOMETHING SIMPLY BECAUSE OUR IDEOLOGIES AND OPINIONS ARE DIFFERENT. Instead of actually, you know, helping, maybe highlighting the human rights violations if cuba every once in a while, helping Yoani and Claudia get their voices heard, you criticize and demean those that do.
get it now?
And please, talk about bullshit strawmen, your embargo argument curries you no favor here, every one knows exactly what the embargo is and does, and only self righteous pricks like you use it as a crutch toi denigrate others.
I suppose you havent read Zoe valdez's post above regarding the embargo eh?
You and your pussy liberal bullshit are the reason the cuban people are still FUCKED, and you come here and CRITICIZE ME?
Go fuck your self or take an ass pounding, whichever you prefer.
These days the Obama administration is giving all kinds of concessions to the Castro brothers while getting nothing in return and the people in Cuba continue to be slaves.
"But the embargo is hurting the Cuban people"
I heard that broken record before. Ese disco esta rayao...
The only embargo existing in Cuba hurting the people for the last fifty years is the one that the Castro brothers keep on them, the rest is bullshit.
The Obama administration could reestablish full relations with the Castro tyranny tomorrow and the people in Cuba will continue hurting as the Castro brothers would take anything from the USA and give very little (if nothing) to the Cuban people.
If anything the Castro brothers and their cohorts would use any bank loans from the USA to fatten their own private offshore accounts as they're doing today with the majority of the foreign currency that flows into Cuba.
For 50 years we have had an embargo on Cuba. It has not helped the human rights situation on the island at all. So why would we continue it in the name of human rights?
Can anyone explain that logic to me?
Adrian:
You are a glutton for punishment, aren't you?
Let's take your question--which is the favorite premise used by those of your ilk since you have nothing else to prove your point--and twist it around.
Can you illustrate to all of us how much freedom the Cuban people have acquired from the engagement and relationship the regime has had with all the other nations in the world?
Can you point out to us one, just one, example of how adopting a policy of constructive engagement with the regime, as Canada, Italy, Spain, the UK, France, and all the other democracies have done, has helped Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet? Hell, I'll make it even easier for you: has helped Pepe and Maria Suarez in Pinar del Rio realize the most basic human rights?
Show me how "engagement" since the fall of the Soviet empire has helped one, single Cuban be freer.
If you can show us that, then your argument makes sense. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
Adrian,
Go through the archives of this blog, seriously, spend maybe two weeks researching it, so you can find the answer to this very stupid fucking question.
Ill give you three, off the cuff:
1. tying the regimes hands economically. if the castro regime has managed to maintain such absolute power and control over its people with such little resources, imagine what it would do if it had access to billions of dollars in credit from the World bank.
2. Embracing diplomatic relations with the castro regime and lifting the embargo is a de facto acceptance of that government and as such condones their mistreatment of their citizens and the violation of of their civil and human rights. It basically says, you harrass, beat, kill and encarcerate your citizens but its cool.
3. the cuban government controls every single aspect of the cuban economy. That means it controls every single business on the island. Thus, what we have is an island of slaves to the state where the state supplies the labor to the business owner and said owner pays the state, and the state, like a true slave owner, pays that labor force a pittance, less than ten percent of what it makes from said owner. The Spanish do it there now. As do the Canadians, French, etc...Do you want American businesses to become de facto slave masters as well? because thats exactly what they will do. What business wouldnt want a labor force it didnt have to worry a God damned thing about?
You have to ask yourself one question: Is the present treatment of the Cuban people by its government and are the human rights violations of same by same morally acceptable to you? if they are not, as I beleive they arent, why would you reward that government?
I'm not a glutton for punishment but I do want to have an honest debate. Isn't that what you want?
What you're saying then is that the problem is that there just hasn't been enough sanctions against Cuba? If the whole world joined in then the government will fall?
I'm sorry I just don't buy it.
You remove the embargo and Castro doesn't have that to beat people over the head with. Than the fault of his governments (economic, human rights, everything) are his own. His position becomes untenable.
Besides if you believe that when you do something for 50 years and it doesn't work then it should be changed (like you do with engagement) then you must also be against the embargo (which also clearly hasn't worked). So maybe the solution is something else entirely.
Some middle ground perhaps?
Adrian:
You know damn well that if the entire world cut off Cuba, the regime wouldn't last a week. In fact, few countries would be able to survive that. Just ask South Africa. So save yourself the embarrassment and don't go down that road.
If you want honest debate, then educate yourself on the topic. Don't make uninformed statements like "the embargo hasn't done anything for 50 years," or ridiculous statements implying that the removal of the embargo would take away the regime's excuse. Have you ever studied the history of dictatorships? If the embargo is removed, then they'll just blame something else. And if that is removed, they'll move on to the next bogeyman.
When you're ready to discuss the topic without throwing out ridiculous claims, then we can discuss it. But as long as you come in here and repeat the same tripe the regime, its agents, and its apologists repeat, you forfeit any credibility.
Adrain,
Oh brother, here we go again....
if I had a nickel for everytime if heard exactly what you have stated here, Id have pulled an Obama and bought the Presidency.
This is my last post of the day:
Ok, Lift the embargo and try something different.
1. Define different. What exactly must we do? And please, no hypotheticals, base your answer on historical data and facts.
2. What concessions will we expect from the castro regime.
3. What reparations can we expect from the castro regime?
If you cannot answer the above, then do what Alberto states above that.
And please, do not use the old bullshit "China" model argument. Everyone trades with china and there are no embargos in China and hows the human rights situation over there?
By the way, Adrian, don't think no one noticed that you did not name one single example of how engagement with the regime by other democracies has ever improved human rights in Cuba.
But that's okay because no example exists.
Well one example is new technology getting into the island letting Cuban bloggers write about their situation. Raising awareness of conditions inside the island. Getting people within the island information outside the island so they can see through the regime's bullshit.
The statement that the embargo has not done anything is not ridiculous. At the very least it has not accomplished its stated goals which is to change the situation in Cuba.
What are the examples you have of how the embargo has improved human rights in Cuba?
Adrian:
I'm surprised. I expected more from you. Citing the availability of the internet for tourists as a benefit to Cubans as a whole is quite a reach. If you have to lie, cheat, and sneak around to be able to access the internet without restrictions, than no one is really doing you a favor now are they? If you have to risk your life, your family's safety, and going to jail for reading "subversive" news sites that are available only for tourists in Cuba, then I think the premise that this new technology helps Cubans falls way short.
And here is where some history would do you good. The embargo was put in place in response to the illegal expropriation of private property in Cuba owned by US interests. It was not initially enacted to achieve regime change. How can we have an honest debate about the embargo if you don't even know the reasons why it was enacted in the first place?
Come on Alberto,
Now you're being unfair. How many times has the embargo been supported, even on this very blog, on the premise that it was either a) a moral stand against human rights abuses and b) a crippling sanction that would bring down the government and thus end the abuse.
I know why it was originally put in place but that is not a debate anyone has been having for 50 years.
If you believe that the embargo should be dropped as soon as Cuba returns the properties to the US then we have no argument.
If you believe that the embargo acts as an effective deterrent to human rights abuses then I disagree but we would be able to have a debate.
And to the other part of your question. True Cubans have to sneak around like criminals only to get on the internet and READ. This is a tragedy but I say that if we impose further sanctions. If we say we are not going to deal with you economically then we are further hampering Cubans abilities to get their hands on computers or books that are readily available here then we're acting just like Castro in that regard. That is where I'm coming from.
Adrian:
How am I being unfair? I pointed to some facts. You may not like them, but they are what they are.
Since you strongly believe the embargo hurts the Cuban people, what more should we be sending over to the Castro brothers besides all the food and medicine we already send them?
Some television equipment perhaps? That will surely help Pepe Suarez get that satellite dish so he can watch Fox News. Oops, wait... those are illegal.
Oh well, maybe we can send them over some new cars to replace all the old ones they're driving around. Oh, shoot... getting a new car without government permission is illegal, too.
Maybe we can send them some computers and routers and monitors so they can all get on the internet. Nope. That's not allowed, either.
So let's see. If we ship more stuff to Cuba, who really benefits? Looks to me like the regime and its tourists are the only ones benefiting.
Oh, and to be fair, as you have pointed out, it may also benefit a few Cubans that can get some scraps that fall off the table.
Yeah, thank you for showing us how scrapping the embargo can really help the situation in Cuba.
You were being unfair when you tried to make the rationalization of the embargo about anything other than human rights abuses. You know as well as I that both supporters and detractors of the embargo are in 100% agreement that the main rationalization behind the embargo is that it will somehow improve the human rights situation in Cuba regardless of what originally acted as a catalyst for implementing it. At least give me that.
If the regime is going to be authoritarian then anything that we can do that will give regular Cubans even a little bit more freedom and knowledge is something worth doing. If we continue with the embargo then even this small percentage don't get the "scraps" as you call them.
I think it's more effective to trade with someone while at the same time condemning the actions of the government. I know China is not a good analogy because of the difference in size of the two countries and the fact that realistically we cannot cut off trade with them but the fact of the matter is that human rights, deplorable as they are in that country, have gotten better.
I have not seen as much improvement in Cuba. All I am asking for is that we take the reasonable attitude where if we do something for so long and it doesn't seem to work then we at least start thinking about other actions that we can take.
Clarification: We cannot realistically cut off trade with China is what I meant.
Adrian,
I met you on a different post here and took my instant dislike to you. I see my instincts were correct.
Probably the only people promoting an end to the embargo are folks like you, those who sound either like fourteen year olds, or in an arrested stage of development or shills for some pro Castro group.
But you are not very good at it if you are a shill, You are not original or creative. If you want to appear to love the sport of the argument, at least sound better informed and have something new to say.
The only people who support ending the embargo are me and a majority of Cuban Americans:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/article925582.ece
We need to debate the issues not your instantaneous opinions of people formed from 14 words on a blog comment.
Adrian:
It is interesting that you point out that China is not a good example to prove your point, and then you use China to prove your point.
We can argue all day the effects the embargo has on human rights in Cuba, but the truth is that until the rest of world gives a shit about Cuba and Cubans, the situation there will not improve. It doesn't matter whether there is an embargo by the US or not. The regime has shown everyone who cares to look that it does a very good job of keeping the Cuban population from reaping the benefits it enjoys by trading with other countries. If you want the US to become another Spain, or Canada, making billions of dollars by trading with a regime that uses the Cuban people as slave labor, then come right out and say it. But don't try to convince me that the US can somehow do what no other nation for the past 50 years has been able to do.
If you are willing to give up that moral ground and become another client of Cuba's slave labor trade, then that is your prerogative. As for myself, I have more integrity than that.
Yes I do want the US to trade with Cuba. I think as much as I hate the Castro regime and as distasteful it might seem to trade with them, believe me I understand your revulsion there, the fact of the matter is that if we can do something to make Cuban's lives better than we should.
Again, If we can make it so even a few more Cubans have access to computers, the internet and the literature that goes along with that. If as you say "It doesn't matter whether there is an embargo by the US or not" then why wouldn't we do that? It'll make it easier for Cubans to get in touch with the outside world. Away from the controlled world the regime has built up. Maybe even spur forces within the island to take action.
I want to make clear I think this should be done while at the same time increasing support for dissidents on the island. It makes my blood boil every time US politicians go down there and not only do they not do anything for regular Cubans but they don't meet with dissidents and then try and tell us how nice the government official.
And yes it's true no one gives a fuck about Cuba but that's the way the world is. The people who are best able to change their situation are the Cubans on the island. We should be doing nothing to hamper that.
Adrian:
I'm going to assume that your intentions are as you stated: that you want to help the Cuban people. With that in mind, allow me to point out some faults that I see in your logic.
We (the US) cannot help Cubans have access to more computers or the internet. Only the regime can do that. So lifting the embargo does nothing in that aspect. We (the US) also cannot help Cubans get in touch with the outside world. Again, only the regime can do that. The embargo is not what restricts the movements of Cubans on the island. It was not the embargo who denied Yoani an exit visa to come to NYC. It was the regime. So again, lifting the embargo does nothing to deal with those issues.
I do agree with you that we should do more to help the dissidents on the island. In the end, it will be Cubans that bring change to Cuba, not the US or any other country. All we can do is help them and NOT help their oppressors.
Now, if the regime were willing to allow more freedoms on the island, if they were willing to make changes and respect human rights in exchange for relaxation of the embargo, then we could start talking about it. But both you and I know the regime will never do that. Especially when they have a host of idiots here in the US, some of which you pointed out in your last comment, who are willing to give the Castro brothers all they want in exchange for nothing. Now why would the regime pay for something they can get for free?
Ok. If this is as far as we can agree then that's something.
My last point would be that regardless of the regime, increased trade would mean more getting into the Cuban people's hands. Crumbs, like you said earlier, but more than now. It's true that the embargo did not deny Yoani a visa but it does say how much money we can send to family and make us decide whether we will go to our father's funeral or our mothers.
You're right it is the regime who has to make these changes. What I am saying is put the onus completely on them.
And you are more than safe in making the assumption that all I want is to help the Cuban people. I want what you want for Cuba: freedom and liberty. The debate here is over how best to achieve that. We shouldn't forget that.
At the risk of getting zapped in the cross-fire (which now seems to have died down a bit), I will offer these opinions.
1. WHAT embargo? Can we agree that it is internal, on the part of the Cuban government against its people? We DO engage in trade with Cuba. Problem is that the food and medicine and equipment don't get to the people. Funny about that. Could it have something to do with the money the Cuban gov't gets from tourism or from selling the stuff abroad?
2. Sanctions worked in South Africa because the S. African government ITSELF decided to get rid of apartheid and change. It cared about world opinion. Castro does not. He's a psychopath.
3. Why should WE make all the concessions. We've already made some (i.e. Cuban-Americans being able to go to Cuba and bring money). Now it's the turn of the Cuban gov't to do something, like release the political prisoners. It's a negotiation, not a capitulation.
4. We're the U.S. We STAND for something. Principles count, like human rights, free speech, freedom of religion.
And Val, I'll translate Claudia's latest.
"I'm sorry I just don't buy it."
Earlier this week we had comments on this blog related to the futility of trying to reason with liberals or engage them with any FACTS. The point was made that they basically don't give a rip about any history or reality checks, only ideology. The above quote proves the point.
I've just finished reading this entire exchange and it supports my hunch that rooted liberals are incurable and incapable of learning anything new/real that goes against their beliefs. Adrian should be ever so thankful to have a source of information to help him educate himself, but he's got preconceptions anchored with concrete -- assumptions that have been proven wrong time and again. You can continue to fire away with solid facts, but it's not going to make a dent of difference: "I'm sorry I just don't buy it"
Adrian, you're a deluded fool if you think you can reach "middle ground" with tyrants. Then again, you're s liberal so being a deluded fool comes naturally.
Yeah I've noticed. I've been trying to reach a middle ground with you guys all afternoon and just when I think we've started to have a civilized conversation I'm called a fool and an ideologue.
You know what else tyrants believe? That their opinions are the only ones that could ever possibly be right.
Adrian:
You continue with an argument that defies logic and human nature.
You say "[y]ou're right it is the regime who has to make these changes. What I am saying is put the onus completely on them."
Let's step back a moment and look at this argument of yours.
What you're saying is that the US should drop its embargo without any concessions from the regime and that will then put the onus on the regime to do something. You, and many others, believe that such an act would deny the regime the ability to blame others for the suffering of the Cuban people and then they'll have no choice but to change.
Let's take your logic a step further and see if it holds water.
Let's say a convicted felon and scam artist walks into the Collection in Coral Gables and he tells them to give him a brand new, red Ferrari. He's not going pay them any money for the car, but instead, the onus will be on him to pay them. And if he doesn't pay, he will have to deal with the consequences of knowing that he can't blame the Collection for filing a judgment against him in court for the cost of the car. At worst, he'll use the car for a few months, wear out the tires and brakes, and probably put a few dings in it, too. It's a hell of a deal; he gets to drive a Ferrari for a few months and the worst thing that can happen is that his credit, which is already shot, has another judgment on it.
That's a great plan, Adrian.
Raynavy33:
I'm with you on all four of your points.
No one has said, exactly, how the embargo has hurt the Communists in Cuba. After half a century. All I've read are insults being hurled by the bucket.
In fact, I don't really believe that the Communists want the embargo to end, not really. For once, I would really like to see a rational, coherent, plan (ANYTHING) on bringing down the Communists in Cuba besides the old formula of "Let's keep doing what we've been doing for the last fifty years which hasn't worked and if anyone disagrees with this plan, he's an enemy."
I myself can think of a more effective method, namely, having Raul in my crosshairs. It's not that hard, folks, it's really not that hard. There's just a lack of will.
And now, the psychotics are going to call me either a liberal or a Communist.
ranavy33,
Your four points are stated very clear and summarizes the reason for continuing the embargo regardless of the critics.
The bottom line here is the following:
As long as the Castro brothers are alive in Cuba don’t expect any significant changes that will lead to the regime undoing because those two bastards know extremely well that they cannot make the mistake of letting the genie out of the bottle the way that Mikhail Gorbachev did in the old Soviet Union, the rest is nonsense.
I only wonder for how long Raul Castro will be able to hold on to power from the moment that Fidel Castro’s death is announced but for certain I can say that the regime will not survive the death of those two.
The fact that the regime keeps making publicity about it’s maximum leader that has not been seem in public for the last three years is further evidence of the inherent weakness of that regime to hold on to power once that leader is gone.
Spygirl,
No one is saying that the embargo has hurt the communists; they are doing just fine.
And you are quite correct, the Castros and their henchmen don't want the appearance of the end of the "embargo"; that would spoil all of their fun.
Just as the Arab world doesn't care about the Palestinians and doesn't want them to improve their lives because Arabs prefer the images of those poor people, those "victims" of Israel, in the same way the Castros do not want Obama's gestures of friendship. They much prefer the appearance of enmity.
I will repeat what is said on this blog ad infinitum. We have not been effective in carrying out an embargo, anyway. If the world HAD consistently squeezed Cuba, there would have been no dictatorship in a very short while. But the world continues to trade with these animals who rule Cuba, and the U.S. provides them with scads of medical supplies and food. What embargo is it exactly that we are supposed to be ending?
Who are these psychotics you refer to? I find only sanity among the writers on babalu. That's why I always enjoy visiting here. Having some anger and expressing it, sometimes with insults or bad language, does not make anyone a psychotic. When I am deeply angry at someone's ignorance, it would be psychotic not to react it. I am quite sane and I find it entertaining the way some express themselves here.
Honey
Believe it or not, I agree with a lot of what you just said. But, first, the fact of the matter is that the embargo is by one nation (us), so it's not really that effective. Whatever the regime wants it can get, either from its twin in Venezuela or by other countries, so in effect, it's nonexistent and serves only their propaganda. Second, in the history of the 20th century, there is not one single recorded instance of an embargo working to brind down a regime or to prevent that regime from carrying out an evil act. That's just the facts.
Mind you, I'm not arguing that ending the embargo will bring down the Communists. That part is highly debatable. What I AM arguing is that the rationale for continuing the embargo ("Let's keep doing what we've been doing for the last fifty years, which hasn't worked and if anyone disagrees with this plan, he's an enemy") is patently laughable. Let's do something more concrete, like putting Raul in our crosshairs.
An excellent question that no one has answered is Can anyone say, exactly, what the embargo has done to bring down the Communists in Cuba?
BTW, I was not referring to you as a psychotic, honey.
Spygirl:
I'll give you one thing the embargo has done to hurt the communists in Cuba: it has denied them credit and hence saved us, American taxpayers, perhaps billions of dollars. By denying them credit, we have denied the Castro brothers hundreds of millions of dollars they would have used to both enrich themselves, and fund their oppressive apparatus.
Will denying the regime credit bring it down? Obviously not; they have acquired credit from other countries, which they have defaulted on while stashing the money in their personal accounts in Europe, and continue to "restructure their debt"--a fancy way of saying "I'm not paying you today, but maybe I'll pay you ten years from now. We'll see."
If you look at it from a purely economic perspective, the embargo has been a great success because it has protected the US from being duped by the Castro regime.
OK, the credit part, I'll accept that. It's minor, but I'll accept that part of the argument, but you have to admit it's a minor point and my main point stands, that the embargo has not brought down the Communists. At the very worst, it has inconvenienced them while supplying them with a propaganda theme.
Spygirl:
You're right, the lack of credit hasn't brought down the regime, but it has protected US interests.
Look at it this way; I have an alarm system installed in my house. This system has stopped burglars from robbing my house. It hasn't, however, stopped burglars from existing. Would that be a good reason for me to dismantle the system and stop paying for the monthly monitoring?
You get my point now?
"I'll give you one thing the embargo has done to hurt the communists in Cuba: it has denied them credit and hence saved us, American taxpayers, perhaps billions of dollars. By denying them credit, we have denied the Castro brothers hundreds of millions of dollars they would have used to both enrich themselves, and fund their oppressive apparatus."
Alberto,
You just nailed the reason for the embargo to continue as in this time and age the least the American taxpayers need is to be nailed by another con artist.
Spygirl,
Read Alberto's two recent posts. Then reread them. Then reread them again and then....
As for trading with Cuba, all of the countries of the world, foolish though they be (see Alberto) are trading with the devil and I don't choose to help the devil ever. In addition all of those countries put together (before Obama's ruinations) don't add up to what OUR trading would effect. We are (were?) the richest, and in more varied ways the richest, country on earth and our embargo is the most important. Do I wish everyone else joined us? You bet. But in the real world most countries doing business have attitudes like yours and see where that's gotten them.
You might take your argument and turn it around. Besides losing money because Castro doesn't pay his debts, all the rest of the world that trades with these devils for the last fifty years have not destroyed communism or fed one Cuban or given one Cuban better health care or more freedom. They are stuck in a policy for 50 years that hasn't worked to anyone's benefit except the devils'. Why don't all of THOSE COUNTRIES try something new? Why don't THEY try an embargo?
I didn't think you were referring to me when you spoke of psychotics. You don't know me.
But just which of the babaluers were you referring to? I would say that it is next to psychotic to consider calling anyone who is responsible for this blog or its main contributors psychotic.
These are among the sanest people I know on this planet.
And for having Raul in the crosshairs well, there is a long list of bad folks around the world that the USA should put in the crosshairs and eliminate them for good instead of sending armies to depose them because it would be a much cheaper alternative to the American taxpayer.
The truth is that if the CIA did not take out the Castro brothers in the sixties and seventies it won’t happen now as former President Ford signed an order, which effectively stopped CIA assassinations (unless another US President waives that order and I can assure you the current one won’t do it).
Honey
Good point. I'm not saying that the embargo's end will herald the demise of the Communists. Not at all. What I'm really, really objecting to are these characters that argue again and again that "Let's keep doing what we've been doing for the last fifty years which hasn't worked and if anyone disagrees with this plan, he's an enemy." That's just insane, it's absurd.
For what I really want if for someone, anyone, to come up with a viable plan with which to bring down the Communists in Cuba. The idea of continuing to do the same thing for the next fifty years what hasn't worked to bring down the Communists in the past fifty years is stupid, plain and simple. I came up with one: put Raul and then Alarcon, and so on, on the crosshairs. It's simple. Anyone can do it. Anyone!
Now, as to the psychotics I mentioned earlier. I just recently began adding to this blog and don't expect my life expectancy here to be more than a month or so, at most. I have seen many individuals who have expressed a desire to exterminate the Communists in Cuba and who have boundless contempt for the liberals in this country (many of whom are closet Communists, BTW), but who were nevertheless banned from this blog simply for disagreeing on a number of other topics, whether it's the weather, or Batista, or whatever. Worse, their contributions to the blog were erased (unless I was unable to find them). I'm sure you have too. The concept that we can disagree as to tactics, but we all have a common goal and everyone should be heard seems to be an alien concept with some individuals. Rene Ariza once said something that was brilliant "We all have to be on the lookout for the Fidel in all of us." Genius.
Spygirl:
Plenty of people on this blog, contributors and readers alike, have articulated their reasons for not removing the embargo against the Cuban regime, and none of them have ever said "let's keep doing what we've been doing for the last fifty years which hasn't worked and if anyone disagrees with this plan, he's an enemy." Perhaps you have us confused with another blog.
As far as your life expectancy on this blog goes, the only people that have ever been banned from Babalu are those that come in here with no purpose other than to antagonize and insult the writers and the readers of this blog.
Spygirl,
By your definition I guess I'm a psychotic, too. Any of those who have been banned I was happy to see go.
Again, read what Alberto has just said.
Viable is the key word. There is a perfect plan to overthrow Castro and to bring freedom to Cuba. But it isn't viable because the only one willing to do it so far is the U.S. All that had to be done is that the free world should have shunned Castro, not traded with him or given him credit and starved him out. Once Russia no longer gave Castro as much support, the rest of the world should have as one unit not gone there, and not traded. He would not have lasted five minutes on that diet.
For some strange reason it is impossible to get the free world to stand on principle anymore.
At least until now the U.S. has.
What about my idea of asking the rest of the world to change THEIR policy of the last 50 years because it hasn't worked?
Alberto,
I think you've made my point. Sometimes, in disagreeing with someone the latter gets antagonized. Me, I've become too Americanized. I believe that we can agree to disagree, as long as our goals are the same. Some people view such a concept as anathema; it is definitely not a Cuban concept.
Honey,
Don't hold your breath about the rest of the world enforcing an all-out embargo. If it hasn't happened in fifty years, it will not now. Besides, you will always have a scab.
Anyway, if there was indeed an all-out embargo by every country in the world, including Venezuela, Russia, and Iran, who do you think would be the last to suffer, who do you think would hoard all the food, medicine, etc.?
I still say put the crosshairs on Raul, Alarco, etc. What's that Cuban saying, Mata el perro y mata la rabia? (have I got it right? It's been a while)
Spygirl,
Who do you think is hoarding all of it now? I am happy to be on the bandwagon for giving them less to hoard.
I always say don't criticize my motives when we all want the same end product and we just have different approaches to get there.
But I think I have been much too patient and forgiving to liberals the past couple of decades. My patience with them is finished now. Anyone who can excuse the behavior and people of this administration, or agree with one single thing they have advocated, is insane.
And, sorry, it's about time everyone figured out that the embargo is a good idea and stopping it is not.
I do not agree to disagree on that. Silly proposals are tiresome.
When a liberal has a good idea, I applaud him. but until I see one, I am not interested in agreeing to disagree anymore because they are like spoiled children. Let them have their way on a bad idea and instead of appeasing them, they only cry for more opportunities to wreak havoc.