Cuba

[pueno]

[mrgybe]

[isobars]

I have yet to hear one benefit the U.S. gained from Obama's forfeiture of our half-century stand against the Castros' abuse of human rights. This was as one-sided as his other global caves. Cuba's Communist regime gets all it has wanted for 50 years -- access to U.S. tourist dollars, a U.S. ambassador and diplomatic relations, recognition as human beings, several prisoners, good guy status, and more. We got one dude who may or may not be a spy. Obama gave away the farm for Gross, yet wouldn't even pick up the phone to get a Marine with PTSD out of Mexican prisons.

He just demonstrated yet AGAIN that U.S. values, promises, red lines, and threats mean absolutely bupkus, and Iran and ISIS are studying his every bumbling move.

[swchandler]

Why continue to punish the Cuban people because of their aging dictatorial leadership? So many on the right foolishly circle around in half century old talking points. What has that really accomplished over time? The rest of the world isn't dedicated to such a losing cause. Why is that? Why is the strongest country in the world still attempting singlehandedly to strangle the poor people of Cuba? It's time to try new strategies that will open the door to the future and empower the Cuba population. If you want something to grow and achieve its potential, you have give it the opportunity to do so.

[nw30]

Of course the Castros are happy, they basically got everything they've always wanted w/o having to give up anything, with the exception of one guy who may, or may not, be a spy, and probably a box of cigars, and a bottle of Rum. It reminds me of the Bergdahl deal.
But the question will remain, the Castros control all the money and will continue to do so. So will there be any trickle down to the citizens of Cuba?
We have no way of knowing that at this time, it will take years to know for sure, no charp chebbies yet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Castro Thanks U.S. but Affirms Cuba’s Communist Rule

By DAMIEN CAVEDEC. 20, 2014

HAVANA — President Raúl Castro declared victory for the Cuban Revolution on Saturday in a wide-ranging speech, thanking President Obama for “a new chapter,” while also reaffirming that restored relations with the United States did not mean the end of Communist rule in Cuba.

In a televised speech that lasted less than an hour at the end of Cuba’s legislative session, Mr. Castro alternated between conciliatory and combative statements against the United States and the rest of the world.

He emphasized that Cuba would accelerate its economic reform, prioritizing an end to the country’s dual-currency system. But he also said that changes needed to be gradual to create a system of “prosperous and sustainable communism.”

Mr. Castro, wearing a traditional white shirt and only occasionally gesturing for emphasis, also referred repeatedly to President Obama, praising him at one point for initiating the biggest change in America-Cuba policy in fifty years. He also stressed that with the process of open relations just beginning “the only way to advance is with mutual respect.”

He insisted as he and Fidel Castro have insisted for years that the United States not meddle in the sovereign affairs of the Cuban state.

“Every country has the inalienable right to choose its own political systems,” Mr. Castro said. “No one should believe that improving relations with the United States means Cuba renouncing its ideas.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/21/world/americas/castro-thanks-us-but-affirms-cubas-communist-rule.html?_r=0

[swchandler]

More from the same NYT article. I'm thinking that NW30 had to leave this part out because it didn't quite fit his desired messaging.


"Mr. Castro, wearing a traditional white shirt called a guayabera and only occasionally gesturing for emphasis, referred repeatedly to Mr. Obama, praising him personally while also emphasizing that with the process of real diplomacy just beginning, “the only way to advance is with mutual respect.”

He insisted, as he and Fidel Castro have for years, that the United States not meddle in the sovereign affairs of the Cuban state.

Carlos Alzugaray Treto, a Cuban diplomat and educator, said Mr. Castro’s strong wording, in a speech that is an annual event and rallying point, seemed to be mostly directed at his Communist Party loyalists.

“It’s domestic politics,” Dr. Alzugaray said.

He noted that, just as Mr. Obama must contend with Cuban-American lawmakers who are angry about the deal, Mr. Castro faces opposition from more conservative party members who recall that Cuba’s previous stance, established in the 1960s, was to hold off resuming relations until the United States lifted its trade embargo completely.

“It’s Raúl reassuring certain people,” Dr. Alzugaray said, adding that in both Cuba and the United States, the embryonic era of friendliness would need to be protected from those resisting reconciliation of any kind. “Obama more than Raúl has initiated the first step, but other steps are needed.”"

[swchandler]

"Why Cuba move will help America"

By Fareed Zakaria

"(CNN) -- In opposing President Barack Obama's opening to Cuba, Florida's Republican senator, Marco Rubio, explained, "This entire policy shift announced today is based on an illusion, on a lie, the lie and the illusion that more commerce and access to money and goods will translate to political freedom for the Cuban people." Rubio has correctly touched on the core issue. But theory, logic and history suggest that he's wrong in his conclusions.

I would recommend to Rubio one of the classics of conservative thought, Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom." He doesn't have to spend too much time on it. The first chapter outlines the "relation between economic freedom and political freedom."

The point Friedman makes in the book is one that America's founding fathers well understood. Drawing on the political philosopher John Locke, they believed that the freedom to buy, sell, own and trade were core elements of human freedom and individual autonomy. As they expand, liberty expands.

Behind the Cuba policy deal Obama discusses Cuba relations Many Cubans welcome closer ties with U.S. This is not just theory, of course. Over the last two centuries, the countries that embraced "more commerce and access to money and goods" in Rubio's phrase -- Britain, America, then Western Europe and East Asia -- have moved toward greater prosperity, but also political freedom. If you exclude oil-rich countries, where money is not earned but dug from the ground, almost every country that has used free markets and free trade to grow is also a democracy.

Yes there are a few exceptions: Singapore and China (though the latter is still not quite a developed economy.) But on the whole, there has been a remarkably strong connection between economic freedom and political freedom.

In Latin America itself, the line has been clear. Augusto Pinochet's regime opened up its economy in the 1970s. Chile began to grow, but that growth then produced a stronger civil society that over time clamored for the end of the Pinochet dictatorship. (The same pattern could be seen in Taiwan, South Korea, Spain and Portugal.) In Latin America today, democracy and markets have acted to reinforce each other, transforming the continent, which 30 years ago was almost entirely ruled by dictatorships to one that is today almost entirely ruled by democracies.

Cuba is an outlier, one of the last regimes in Latin America that has embraced neither markets nor ballots. The Obama administration is acting on the theory that more commerce, capitalism, contact, travel and trade will empower the people of Cuba and thus give them a greater voice in their political future. And so the first point to make is that it will help Cubans economically -- it will raise their incomes, their standard of living, and boost access to technology. These are all good things in and of themselves.

But easing the embargo will also help Americans, who will benefit from being able to trade with a neighbor. This is the reason that conservatives have long understood that free trade is not a gift bestowed on someone. It helps both countries and in particular, helps the United States.

That's why the Wall Street Journal's editorial page -- bastion of conservative thought -- has been an advocate on lifting the trade embargo against Cuba, which is a far larger step than Obama's normalization.

So, did it support Obama's opening? Of course not. It turns out that he has done it in the wrong way. It is difficult not to think that the problem here is not the policy, but who the president is. Had George W. Bush announced this initiative, I have a feeling that the Wall Street Journal would be hailing it -- and Rubio would be quoting Milton Friedman to us all."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/opinion/zakaria-cuba-embargo-change/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

[nw30]

[joew]

Nw 30, sorry to disappoint, the classic cars in Cuba kept rolling through love, amazing ingenuity, soviet tractor parts, train springs and handcrafted machined parts are not collectible, they are Frankenstiens probably not road worthy, and offer little appeal to collectors. WE didn't miss the boat on Cuba, it was a 1959 Vegas, and it is a seperate nation. My contention, we should have invaded the place and knocked off the Castros the day after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan!

[KGB-NP]