NationStates Jolt Archive

So, while I can understand many people are not supportive of Castro, or the Cuban Revolution, I think we can all agree that this is simply disgusting.

Imagine if the Cubans had held a death party every time a POTUS died?

“Basically, the only thing we're trying to do is have a venue, a giant venue ready for people, if they wish, to speak to the media, to show their emotions. It's not that we're doing an official death party,” Mr. Regalado said Monday.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070129.wmiamicuba0129/BNStory/International/home

This sort of thing goes on all the time. An anarchist friend of mine has informed me that when Thatcher dies there are plans for a street party in the middle of London. If someone is a contraversial figure, plenty of people will be glad at their demise.

This sort of thing goes on all the time. An anarchist friend of mine has informed me that when Thatcher dies there are plans for a street party in the middle of London. If someone is a contraversial figure, plenty of people will be glad at their demise.

When Pinochet died, there were also unofficial parties. You know, random street parties. mybe organised by some of the people attending them.

This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

When Pinochet died, there were also unofficial parties. You know, random street parties. mybe organised by some of the people attending them.

This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

Ah yes. Now you say that, I do notice the difference!

Even if Castro was a tyrant, he wasn't as bad as the real dictators out there.

Also... WTF is a POTUS?

That makes me nauseous--that the city would back this. Let the people of Little Havana do whatever they want to on their own, but this is fucking disgusting, that a city government would do such a thing.

Even if Castro was a tyrant, he wasn't as bad as the real dictators out there.

Also... WTF is a POTUS?

I wondered that too...then i realised it must be "President Of The United States"

at least, I hope thats what it means, or i'll be rather embarassed!

Castro really wasn't that bad, and no one was even celebrating when Saddam died. I kind of miss the big bearded cigar smoking dictator. :(

I wondered that too...then i realised it must be "President Of The United States"

at least, I hope thats what it means, or i'll be rather embarassed!

Yes. Sorry.

POTUS = President Of The United States. I thought, wrongly, that it was a common abbreviation.

Castro really wasn't that bad, and no one was even celebrating when Saddam died. I kind of miss the big bearded cigar smoking dictator. :(

All the badasses are dying out :(

Yes. Sorry.

POTUS = President Of The United States. I thought, wrongly, that it was a common abbreviation.

Ah, so, POTUS is kinda like PMO... :p and other pointless and often annoyign acronyms.

Ah, so, POTUS is kinda like PMO... :p and other pointless and often annoyign acronyms.

STFU:p

So, while I can understand many people are not supportive of Castro, or the Cuban Revolution, I think we can all agree that this is simply disgusting.

Imagine if the Cubans had held a death party every time a POTUS died?



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070129.wmiamicuba0129/BNStory/International/home


Every one would be a bit excessive.

On the one hand I have sympathy for those he drove out in the 80's. On the other hand the ones who supported the regime he overthrew can fuck off with themselves, as the whole thing is largely down to them.

have i ever mentioned that i find it really hard to empathize with the leadership of the exile community?

Every one would be a bit excessive.

On the one hand I have sympathy for those he drove out in the 80's. On the other hand the ones who supported the regime he overthrew can fuck off with themselves, as the whole thing is largely down to them.

I think the city of Miami can show its obvious sympathy for anti-Castro Cubans by letting them have their own parties, and not charging them for permits, cleaning up the garbage, etc. which is morbid but understandable.

The city has overstepped its bounds by paying for a big party to celebrate the death of a human being.

Pretty low.

I expect this from the gusanos, but not from the city itself.

Jumping the gun a bit, aren't they? Last I heard, Castro was still running around saying "I'm not dead yet!"

But then, Dick Cheney isn't dead yet either, and who'd have believed that six years ago?

have i ever mentioned that i find it really hard to empathize with the leadership of the exile community?

At least you don't have to live near them.

At least you don't have to live near them.

Do they still believe that they will be in power some day in the future and accepted as liberators? Because it does not seem consistent with reality.

have i ever mentioned that i find it really hard to empathize with the leadership of the exile community?


Can't comment much there, as I know little about them. I did see some of them interviewed when there was some argument about whether a child should stay in the states or go back to Cuba - they tended to get a bit "heated". Again, depending on how they got there I have either sympathy, or a large kick in the crotch for them.

Do they still believe that they will be in power some day in the future and accepted as liberators? Because it does not seem consistent with reality.

True, but consistency with reality has never been a necessary requirement for a belief system. In fact, most people seem to find it much easier to believe things that aren't consistent with reality than to believe things that are.

Huh? Castro isn't dead yet.

Also, there were parties when Saddam died. There were unofficial parties in Iraq, Kuwait, the U.S., and everywhere else. Those who attended the parties who usually those who Saddam affected in a personal way (as in, he executed so-and-so's father and mother).

Huh? Castro isn't dead yet.

Also, there were parties when Saddam died. There were unofficial parties in Iraq, Kuwait, the U.S., and everywhere else. Those who attended the parties who usually those who Saddam affected in a personal way (as in, he executed so-and-so's father and mother).


And that's fine. Unofficial parties are usually awesome, with people drinking and laughing, and with any luck they'll be smooching too, even if it is to celebrate a person's death.

But this is official. This is the City of Miami organising and apparently paying for a big Castro is Dead party, just to score votes with the exiles.

I thought Miami was civilised.

Last time I checked, Castro was still alive... or most people think he is... or they haven't officially announced it...

And that's fine. Unofficial parties are usually awesome, with people drinking and laughing, and with any luck they'll be smooching too, even if it is to celebrate a person's death.

But this is official. This is the City of Miami organising and apparently paying for a big Castro is Dead party, just to score votes with the exiles.

I thought Miami was civilised.

True, it probably is only to gain points/support from Cubans.

... or they haven't officially announced it...

You think the Cuban government is going to announce when Castro's dead?

You think the Cuban government is going to announce when Castro's dead?

I have my hopes up...

I have my hopes up...

It would be leaked out, the government wouldn't want to give information like that away that or they defrost a Castro clone.

When you become a leader of nation, common sense would be that some people might hate you. Fidel took away the possession of the rich and shared it with the poor. If you take in the position of the rich, I could see how they feel, and if I was among the poor, I could also understand Castro's move. Castro should have done what the Chinese have done, embrace capitalism but hold onto the government they want (that will at least keep both groups contempt.) Cuba was America's Las Vegas back then, a tax free region for the American businessman to do business, and prostitution was rampant. It was an environment where only the few (and mostly non-Cuban) have prospered and enjoyed the status quo. It was only a time which a person like Fidel Castro would have popped up and challenged the Cuban leaders back then. Even with the American embargo, Cuba is a success story, it has one of the highest literacy rates (in Latin America), high doctor per patient rates (in Latin America), and economy is surviving against an American sanction. For a big and powerful nation, America sure behaves stubborn, how many times has it tried to murder Fidel Castro? It tried to invade Cuba and this man lived this far (probably outlived all the American presidents that tried to kill him :D ), what a champion. Lets not forget, this is the man who sent Cuban soldiers to help fight colonialism in Africa while America was secretly supporting pro-colonialist nations (the Angola war, South Africa war, and so on) so maybe few materialistic people in America might hate him but what about the rest of the world? I support Fidel but I also support a capitalistic Cuba, maybe his brother might even bring in Democracy but until then, outside nations cannot force a nation into what they want, but I guess some nations haven’t yet learned this.

You guys should inform yourselves a little better before just repeating everything the Cuban government says. You should remember that Cuba is a dictatorship after all, you should take whatever the government says with a grain of salt. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. http://www.state.gov/p/wha
/ci/14776.htm (http://www.state.gov/p/wha/ci/14776.htm)

And I don't see why anyone but the residents of of Miami should care what the City does with its money. If the residents of Miami are unhappy with the way their leaders are spending their tax money then they will vote them out of power.

You gave me a scare with that title. I thought for a moment Castro had actually died!

Anyway, it's bloody disgusting. But sadly not surprising. Many of the Miami exiles (or at least the leaders of the community) are raving neocon extremists.


This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

Very good point.

While I don't agree with the action taken by the city, I also don't find it "disgusting." It is the prerogative of the city whether or not they want to celebrate the end of an era marked by poverty, tyranny, and repression in the home country of many Miami residents. There's nothing wrong with rejoicing in the death of a dictator, even if he wasn't a modern Stalin. If you brutally oppress your citizens, don't expect to be mourned over by them too much. And it's not like this party is going to be a huge burden on tax-payers, so I really don't see the problem here.

Miami's cuban establishment is pretty unsavory in general.

Let's nuke-em

If you brutally oppress your citizens, don't expect to be mourned over by them too much.
No one's asking for the city to go into a day of mourning here, or even to stop the Cuban community from celebrating on their own.


And it's not like this party is going to be a huge burden on tax-payers, so I really don't see the problem here.
It shouldn't be a burden on taxpayers whatsoever--the idea that Miami taxpayers are going to put one penny toward this celebration is despicable to me.

He's dead?

Aw shit. Now we're pretty screwed.

So, while I can understand many people are not supportive of Castro, or the Cuban Revolution, I think we can all agree that this is simply disgusting.
No. I, for one would dance on his grave.

It shouldn't be a burden on taxpayers whatsoever--the idea that Miami taxpayers are going to put one penny toward this celebration is despicable to me.

So what? I find the concept of spending tax money supporting corrupt organizations such as Halliburton despicable. I find the idea of spending tax money so that the state can continue employing the death penalty disgusting. I find that paying tax money to many projects wrong; this is one of the most minor ones out there. Honestly -- who cares? What's the big fuss about? You can't have it your way all the time; that's the entire point of a democracy. If the people want a party, then they'll get a party.

I wondered that too...then i realised it must be "President Of The United States"
really? I thought it meant "Poopyhead Of The United States".

When you become a leader of nation, common sense would be that some people might hate you. Fidel took away the possession of the rich and shared it with the poor. If you take in the position of the rich, I could see how they feel, and if I was among the poor, I could also understand Castro's move. Castro should have done what the Chinese have done, embrace capitalism but hold onto the government they want (that will at least keep both groups contempt.) Cuba was America's Las Vegas back then, a tax free region for the American businessman to do business, and prostitution was rampant. It was an environment where only the few (and mostly non-Cuban) have prospered and enjoyed the status quo. It was only a time which a person like Fidel Castro would have popped up and challenged the Cuban leaders back then. Even with the American embargo, Cuba is a success story, it has one of the highest literacy rates (in Latin America), high doctor per patient rates (in Latin America), and economy is surviving against an American sanction. For a big and powerful nation, America sure behaves stubborn, how many times has it tried to murder Fidel Castro? It tried to invade Cuba and this man lived this far (probably outlived all the American presidents that tried to kill him :D ), what a champion. Lets not forget, this is the man who sent Cuban soldiers to help fight colonialism in Africa while America was secretly supporting pro-colonialist nations (the Angola war, South Africa war, and so on) so maybe few materialistic people in America might hate him but what about the rest of the world? I support Fidel but I also support a capitalistic Cuba, maybe his brother might even bring in Democracy but until then, outside nations cannot force a nation into what they want, but I guess some nations haven’t yet learned this.

Fidel was not trying to fight colonialism.:headbang: He was doing what his handler the USSR told him to do. He was sending troops to try to prop up or start communist revolutions and gain support for the USSR in the world. It also allowed places for the USSR to selll weapons and make money. To in anyway make him seem like some kind of BS hero is really stretching because he is/was nothing but a tinpot dictator. His reasons for overthrowing the corrupt Cuban government were just, but to say things there are great is a stretch. If you do not bow down and kiss the butt of Fidel you end up in a jail or even dead so in that sense he became the very thing he overthrew. He is as evil as the chinese government you so highly support. Where if you do anything like talk bad about the government or even have a peaceful protest you have a good chance of winding up dead. Or was Tianamen Square just a western set up and fake like the Moon walk and the holocaust?

Let's nuke-em



Miami or Cuba??

The only reason you all think it's disgusting is because he's left wing. If it was Hitler or Chiang Kai-shek, or when it was Pinochet, you'd be partying your asses off.

Excellent. I'm going to celebrate Miami's death.

The only reason you all think it's disgusting is because he's left wing. If it was Hitler or Chiang Kai-shek, or when it was Pinochet, you'd be partying your asses off.

HITLER? PINOCHET? You're seriously comparing Castro to these guys?

You know what I say? I say we ask Mr. Strawman about that:

http://www.thiscenturysucks.com/images/strawman.jpg


What's that Mr. Strawman? Bush is just like Hitler in every way? Yeah! That's right, Mr. Strawman!

HITLER? PINOCHET? You're seriously comparing Castro to these guys?

You know what I say? I say we ask Mr. Strawman about that:

http://www.thiscenturysucks.com/images/strawman.jpg


What's that Mr. Strawman? Bush is just like Hitler in every way? Yeah! That's right, Mr. Strawman!

1) The Hitler referrence is a Godwin.

2) Where did Bush come from?

3) Comparing Castro to Pinochet is not a Strawman. In fact, from an objective point of view, Castro is probably worse.

HITLER? PINOCHET? You're seriously comparing Castro to these guys?

A dictator is a dictator is a dictator.

The only reason you all think it's disgusting is because he's left wing. If it was Hitler or Chiang Kai-shek, or when it was Pinochet, you'd be partying your asses off.
You are Godwin'd, and I claim my five pounds!

It shouldn't be a burden on the taxpayers of Miami, but I see nothing intrinsically wrong with the exile community celebrating the death of Mr. Castro.

In their eyes, he's a dictator who stole their families belongings, forced them out of their homeland because they were "reactionaries", whatever that means. Then, during the Cuban Missile Crisis begged Soviet theater commanders to launch FROG missiles against Miami when it appeared that Khruschev would cave.



Me, personally, I'm ready for good Cigars to return to the United States.

A dictator is a dictator is a dictator.

Would you like to have a talk with Mr. Strawman's friend, Mr. Ignorance?

Would you like to have a talk with Mr. Strawman's friend, Mr. Ignorance?

Would you like to have a talk with Mr. addressing his points instead of covering your ears and muttering?

Me, personally, I'm ready for good Cigars to return to the United States.

Not to mention vacations to Havana.

Who gives a crap about Miami anyway?

Edit: Oh no, American tourists. There goes paradise. Or at least paradise for the Canadian tourists.

Not to mention vacations to Havana.

Absolutely.

Would you like to have a talk with Mr. addressing his points instead of covering your ears and muttering?

Excuse me? He just said that all dictators are basically Hitlers and Pinochets. There really isn't a logical way to argue with someone like that.

The only reason you all think it's disgusting is because he's left wing. If it was Hitler or Chiang Kai-shek, or when it was Pinochet, you'd be partying your asses off.

Let me spell it out for you--and I'll type it slowly in hopes you'll be able to follow. I don't care who parties. I fully expect the Cuban community to celebrate for days once Castro shuffles off this mortal coil. I think it's in poor taste, but so is Britney Spears's music.

My objection is that a city government is sponsoring this, using taxpayer funds to foot the bill. Fortunately, I'm not a Miami taxpayer, so it won't come out of my pocket, but if I were, you can bet your ass I'd be down at the next Council meeting screaming "you're paying for what?" And I'd be doing it no matter whose death they were celebrating.

Absolutely.

Why don't you lot stick to the parts of the Caribbean you've already made suck instead of looking to ruin what's left for the rest of the Western hemisphere? Like St. Thomas. Keep it, or what's left of it. Leave Cuba for the other nationalities to enjoy.

Excuse me? He just said that all dictators are basically Hitlers and Pinochets. There really isn't a logical way to argue with someone like that.

He said that all dictators were dictators, which, logically, makes sense. Some are worse than others, but being "not as bad" doesn't give them any leniency on the basic charge.

Furthermore, Mr. Pinochet is less distasteful than Mr. Castro, as, even though Mr. Pinochet is rather distasteful. Mr. Pinochet is responsible for the deaths of 2,279 people who opposed him politically, and the torturing of, perhaps 30,000. These numbers are easily confirmed by commissions within the Chilean government and international community that took place after the fact. Chile is now an open society.

Mr. Castro, even though no clear numbers exist, is most likely accountable for the deaths of something like 10,000 political opponents, but due to the closed nature of Cuban society, these numbers cannot be confirmed with much certainty.

Why don't you lot stick to the parts of the Caribbean you've already made suck instead of looking to ruin what's left for the rest of the Western hemisphere? Like St. Thomas. Keep it, or what's left of it. Leave Cuba for the other nationalities to enjoy.

Nope. Cuba's on my list of places to go once Castro dies and Raoul's attempt to remain in power fizzles out in a final, violent spree.

My objection is that a city government is sponsoring this, using taxpayer funds to foot the bill. Fortunately, I'm not a Miami taxpayer, so it won't come out of my pocket, but if I were, you can bet your ass I'd be down at the next Council meeting screaming "you're paying for what?" And I'd be doing it no matter whose death they were celebrating.

Agreed.

Why don't you lot stick to the parts of the Caribbean you've already made suck instead of looking to ruin what's left for the rest of the Western hemisphere? Like St. Thomas. Keep it, or what's left of it. Leave Cuba for the other nationalities to enjoy.

No, 80 miles from Miami is great...once we negotiate a few border laws, day trips to Cuba could become a reality.

Nope. Cuba's on my list of places to go once Castro dies and Raoul's attempt to remain in power fizzles out in a final, violent spree.

Or he goes Chinese and opens up the country to investors.

Or he goes Chinese and opens up the country to investors.

He actually does make me think Deng, but I cannot be certain.

I'm getting ready to hold a memorial service. Castro is one cool guy. I even named my iPod after him.

No, 80 miles from Miami is great...once we negotiate a few border laws, day trips to Cuba could become a reality.

And Cuba kisses it's international tourism industry goodbye in so doing. Why do you suppose it's such a popular vacation destination for non-Americans, V? Here's a hint: it's not just the cigars.

I'm getting ready to hold a memorial service. Castro is one cool guy. I even named my iPod after him.

Well, he's not dead yet. In fact, I expect to see a video of him any day singing "I feel happeeeeeee" before Raul knocks him in the head.

And Cuba kisses it's international tourism industry goodbye in so doing. Why do you suppose it's such a popular vacation destination for non-Americans, V? Here's a hint: it's not just the cigars.

Feel free to go somewhere else then :D

I'm getting ready to hold a memorial service. Castro is one cool guy. I even named my iPod after him.

Oooh!

I named my Sansa after Bill Clinton!

And Cuba kisses it's international tourism industry goodbye in so doing. Why do you suppose it's such a popular vacation destination for non-Americans, V? Here's a hint: it's not just the cigars.

China, Japan, and the US can support Cuba more than well enough.

Well, he's not dead yet. In fact, I expect to see a video of him any day singing "I feel happeeeeeee" before Raul knocks him in the head.

We can only hope. He does appear to be unkillable, so far.

Oh gosh, I hope Castro kicks the bucket before the semester is up. We need an excuse to get rid of all the cake in the fridge.

Castro's been dead for thirty years. Every few years they(by which I mean They) kill the impersonator right when he thinks he will confess, and bring in a new impersonator. The reason he's "sick" right now is because they're having trouble finding a new "Castro" and they need to make it seem realistic. Obviously it's working, as so much of NSG dosn't seem to know of this. *nods a lot*

Feel free to go somewhere else then :D

We already do. It's called Cuba.

We already do. It's called Cuba.

And we're all going to go there. Repeatedly.

Feel free to go somewhere else. :D

So, while I can understand many people are not supportive of Castro, or the Cuban Revolution, I think we can all agree that this is simply disgusting.

I don't agree. I plan to drink myself silly when the son of a bitch croaks.

Imagine if the Cubans had held a death party every time a POTUS died?

That's their right.

Miami is full of Douchebags.

Miami is full of Douchebags.

Apparently, so is the city council. They are douchebag enough to spend their limited resources on a douchebag party that would be considered douchebaggy in the extreme by everyone I know, and the douchebags who elected them think this douchebag of an idea is a good one, and so the voting douchebags will re-elect the ghoulish douchebag city councillors.

I have a question. After Castro dies, who will Miami have to hate as the Cuban people continue towards a more dignified socialism?

I have a question. After Castro dies, who will Miami have to hate as the Cuban people continue towards a more dignified socialism?

Raul? *shrug*

Apparently, so is the city council. They are douchebag enough to spend their limited resources on a douchebag party that would be considered douchebaggy in the extreme by everyone I know, and the douchebags who elected them think this douchebag of an idea is a good one, and so the voting douchebags will re-elect the ghoulish douchebag city councillors.

I have a question. After Castro dies, who will Miami have to hate as the Cuban people continue towards a more dignified socialism?

His brother, presumably.

In all honesty, I couldn't care less.

Let them do what they want. I don't remember being particularly respectful after Ronald Reagan died.

I was happy when Ronnie Ray-Gun died and when Pinochet died, but I didn't throw a fucking party. That's just sick.

I was happy when Ronnie Ray-Gun died and when Pinochet died, but I didn't throw a fucking party. That's just sick.

Not to justify their actions, which I agree are distasteful, but to put them in something more of a perspective, Castro is viewed as having forced their families from their homeland. He is also viewed as having, essentially, stolen their families property. They perceive a very grave personal damage as directly resulting from the actions of Mr. Castro, and as such, they respond with loathing.

I must ask you, do you perceive Mr. Reagan or Mr. Pinochet's actions as having done either of those things to you? If so, then perhaps you can understand their perspective a bit more effectively.

Not to justify their actions, which I agree are distasteful, but to put them in something more of a perspective, Castro is viewed as having forced their families from their homeland. He is also viewed as having, essentially, stolen their families property. They perceive a very grave personal damage as directly resulting from the actions of Mr. Castro, and as such, they respond with loathing.

I must ask you, do you perceive Mr. Reagan or Mr. Pinochet's actions as having done either of those things to you? If so, then perhaps you can understand their perspective a bit more effectively.

Ummmmmmmmmmmm...on what planet was Pinochet better than Castro?

Ummmmmmmmmmmm...on what planet was Pinochet better than Castro?

They're both nearly equally despicable. Not quite Hitler-Stalin-Mao super-monster-despicable, but pretty despicable.

What my post was arguing, though, is that to properly understand the mindset of the Exile community in Miami, you have to understand their viewpoints on Mr. Castro. It's a different situation from how Mr. Pinochet affected most of our individual lives (as in: Not at all).

They're both nearly equally despicable. Not quite Hitler-Stalin-Mao super-monster-despicable, but pretty despicable.

What my post was arguing, though, is that to properly understand the mindset of the Exile community in Miami, you have to understand their viewpoints on Mr. Castro. It's a different situation from how Mr. Pinochet affected most of our individual lives (as in: Not at all).

I cannot believe you would put the two in the same category. That's just stupid. Castro faced alot of controversy, but he never sank to the same level as Pinochet. To suggest that shows ignorance of the situation as a whole.

Not to justify their actions, which I agree are distasteful, but to put them in something more of a perspective, Castro is viewed as having forced their families from their homeland. He is also viewed as having, essentially, stolen their families property. They perceive a very grave personal damage as directly resulting from the actions of Mr. Castro, and as such, they respond with loathing.

I must ask you, do you perceive Mr. Reagan or Mr. Pinochet's actions as having done either of those things to you? If so, then perhaps you can understand their perspective a bit more effectively.

put into perspective those people that left Cuba when Castro rid Cuba of a dictatorship that impoverished the people, why did those people leave?...is it possible they were from the elite minority that dominated the country?...before Castro Cuba was little more than an US Fiefdom run by gangsters, the people had no access health care, education, property or hope for their future...the exiles didn't give a fuck for their countrymen and their poverty, Castro did...

I cannot believe you would put the two in the same category. That's just stupid. Castro faced alot of controversy, but he never sank to the same level as Pinochet. To suggest that shows ignorance of the situation as a whole.

You mean Castro's little habit of having dissenters lined up against the wall and shot for the first fifteen or so years of his reign? Or putting dissidents in labor camps? Perhaps his delusional begging for the Soviet theater commanders to fire their nuclear tipped FROG Missiles at Miami in 1962? C'mon. You're sugarcoating Mr. Castro for the simple reason that his ideology is similar to yours, and he used to cut a dashing figure.

put into perspective those people that left Cuba when Castro rid Cuba of a dictatorship that impoverished the people, why did those people leave?...is it possible they were from the elite minority that dominated the country?...before Castro Cuba was little more than an US Fiefdom run by gangsters, the people had no access health care, education, property or hope for their future...the exiles didn't give a fuck for their countrymen and their poverty, Castro did...

Is the Batista regime free of criticism? Absolutely not. Was he justified in overthrowing Batista, I'm pretty sure he was. This justification, though, does not excuse the actions of Mr. Castro's government after the Revolution.

But the exiles are a far more diverse group than you claim, arriving not only immediately after the revolution, but 125,000 fled this socialist paradise during the Mariel Boatlift, as well as those who continue to flee the island.

You mean Castro's little habit of having dissenters lined up against the wall and shot for the first fifteen or so years of his reign? Or putting dissidents in labor camps? Perhaps his delusional begging for the Soviet theater commanders to fire their nuclear tipped FROG Missiles at Miami in 1962? C'mon. You're sugarcoating Mr. Castro for the simple reason that his ideology is similar to yours, and he used to cut a dashing figure.

Or maybe I don't think that a communist revolution is the same thing as the American government overthrowing a democratically elected administration and installing a dictator simply because the democratically elected administration had a left lean. I don't agree with everything that Castro did; in fact, he did some awful things at the start of his political career. However, he is not even in the same category as Pinochet. And it has nothing to do with looks, either. I can't believe you think I would base my political opinions on appearence. Not every f.cking teenage girl does that.

First of all, nothing is offical yet.

Secondly: I agree that the city has no right to spend money on the party.

Thirdly: "Political Correctness" - the art of voicing an opinion with out pissing any one off, is wrong. Its ego stroking, mental masterbation; and destroying us as a global people.

Go ahead, make someone mad, all forbid they learn something new!

So this back and forth waste of electrons of who was the "least worst" dictator in history, is utterly pointless.

Its like saying that the verdict should be a death verdict in a war crimes tribunal if the total was 5k and above, but merely 3 years in prison if 4,999 or less.

its subjective with people. like abortion, same sex marriage, and polygamy.

its also off topic ;)

ehh, we all possibly end life with a biography on a 3x5 in. card that is our only worth. dunno if this was mine. doubt it.

FL Rafe
The Rafe System

Wow, let's all celebrate the fact that we all have no healthcare or govt support!

Or maybe I don't think that a communist revolution is the same thing as the American government overthrowing a democratically elected administration and installing a dictator simply because the democratically elected administration had a left lean. I don't agree with everything that Castro did; in fact, he did some awful things at the start of his political career. However, he is not even in the same category as Pinochet.
Once again, I will never justify the role the US played in the overthrow of Mr. Allende, it was a crime, committed by a criminal administration. But, Mr. Pinochet's actions in Chile closely mirror those of Mr. Castro's in Cuba, when it comes to the handling of political dissenters.


And it has nothing to do with looks, either. I can't believe you think I would base my political opinions on appearence. Not every f.cking teenage girl does that.

Easy. I was actually saying that he has all the elements of a great adventure story in his rise, but if you wish to interperet it otherwise, well, I can't stop you.

Didn't I see this story on the West Wing the other night?

What is with the obsession with Fidel Castro and Che Guevara on the part of everyone from strong left-liberals to hard-line Leninists?

Ummmmmmmmmmmm...on what planet was Pinochet better than Castro?

Castro killed far more (at least 15,000) than Pinochet (who killed around 3,000). Pinochet, for the most part, confined his terror to Chile itself. He didn't spread it around the globe like Castro did (Central America, Central Africa, etc.). And Pinochet didn't send troops to other countries to prop up unpopular dictatorships (Angola, Ethiopia).

What is with the obsession with Fidel Castro and Che Guevara on the part of everyone from strong left-liberals to hard-line Leninists?

They're romantic (as in the style, not the crappy novels with Fabio on the front) heroes. Dashing revolutionaries, coming out of the bush to overthrow a corrupt and tyrranical government. What's not to love about them?

That is, until you realize that they lined some 10,000 people up against walls, declared them "counterrevolutionaries" and shot them.

I believe Lenin and Che are cultural communist icons, and represent equality.

What is with the obsession with Fidel Castro and Che Guevara on the part of everyone from strong left-liberals to hard-line Leninists?

I think the Che Guevara thing has something to do with Mandy Patinkin in Evita. Or, it does for me, at least. Beyond that, I think we just all need some sort of hero figure in our life, someone to put on T-shirts and name our Ipods after. Within socialism, it's hard to find a prominent figure who didn't do at least a few things wrong.

Is the Batista regime free of criticism? Absolutely not. Was he justified in overthrowing Batista, I'm pretty sure he was. This justification, though, does not excuse the actions of Mr. Castro's government after the Revolution.

But the exiles are a far more diverse group than you claim, arriving not only immediately after the revolution, but 125,000 fled this socialist paradise during the Mariel Boatlift, as well as those who continue to flee the island.

that's true but I'll wager that of those 125,000 left Cuba due to extreme hardship caused by the US embargo, many were economic refugees...

as for Castro's behaviour after the revolution I won't judge him...the revolution was under threat from a Super Power only 90miles away, one invasion, plans of assignation, plans for another invasion or bombing, an embargo...how could Castro and Cuba be anything but a police state their future was in doubt, how did the USA react to a perceived threat from Iraq? do you expect any different from a tiny country like Cuba when threatened by the USA?

Castro killed far more (at least 15,000) than Pinochet (who killed around 3,000). Pinochet, for the most part, confined his terror to Chile itself. He didn't spread it around the globe like Castro did (Central America, Central Africa, etc.). And Pinochet didn't send troops to other countries to prop up unpopular dictatorships (Angola, Ethiopia).

Pinochet was an unpopular dictatorship propped up by another country.

Pinochet was an unpopular dictatorship propped up by another country.

He also held an election, lost, accepted the results, and stepped down.

Pinochet was an unpopular dictatorship propped up by another country.

Exactly right, the US pretty much killed those people with their tax dollars.

I thought Miami was civilised.

define this word please.

is it something along the line of "only doing things that i agree of"

They're romantic (as in the style, not the crappy novels with Fabio on the front) heroes. Dashing revolutionaries, coming out of the bush to overthrow a corrupt and tyrranical government. What's not to love about them?

That is, until you realize that they lined some 10,000 people up against walls, declared them "counterrevolutionaries" and shot them.

not that the governments they replaced did the same and often worse...revolutionaries usually represent the people being oppressed by corrupt and tyrannical governments...if it were not for dictatorships revolutionaries wouldn't have any support from the population and the revolution would fail...

Fidel was not trying to fight colonialism.:headbang: He was doing what his handler the USSR told him to do. He was sending troops to try to prop up or start communist revolutions and gain support for the USSR in the world. It also allowed places for the USSR to selll weapons and make money. To in anyway make him seem like some kind of BS hero is really stretching because he is/was nothing but a tinpot dictator. His reasons for overthrowing the corrupt Cuban government were just, but to say things there are great is a stretch. If you do not bow down and kiss the butt of Fidel you end up in a jail or even dead so in that sense he became the very thing he overthrew. He is as evil as the chinese government you so highly support. Where if you do anything like talk bad about the government or even have a peaceful protest you have a good chance of winding up dead. Or was Tianamen Square just a western set up and fake like the Moon walk and the holocaust?

Fact check! Castro didn't bother talking to the Soviet Union until he got snubbed by the US. In fact, he was trying to work out a deal with the US.

This has been a community service by your local generalite. Fighting ignorance and delusions one fact at a time.

He also held an election, lost, accepted the results, and stepped down.

But of course he was justified killing all those people just because they were suspected 'leftists' and the US conservatives don't like their ideology, right...

And in reality the number of those he killed most likely exceeds what is currently known, the mass 'disappearances' most likely claimed thousands more. Not to mention the suffering and mass abject poverty instilled by his 'free market' policies.

that's true but I'll wager that of those 125,000 left Cuba due to extreme hardship caused by the US embargo, many were economic refugees...
That's bull and you know it.

At that time, the USSR was pumping millions of Rubles (at a net loss, I might add) into the Cuban economy every single day.

as for Castro's behaviour after the revolution I won't judge him...the revolution was under threat from a Super Power only 90miles away, one invasion, plans of assignation, plans for another invasion or bombing, an embargo...how could Castro and Cuba be anything but a police state their future was in doubt, how did the USA react to a perceived threat from Iraq? do you expect any different from a tiny country like Cuba when threatened by the USA?

I nearly gagged reading this.

Fact check! Castro didn't bother talking to the Soviet Union until he got snubbed by the US. In fact, he was trying to work out a deal with the US.

This has been a community service by your local generalite. Fighting ignorance and delusions one fact at a time.

Exactly right, Kennedy was far more likely to push the button than the Soviets.

But of course he was justified killing all those people just because they were suspected 'leftists' and the US conservatives don't like their ideology, right...

And in reality the number of those he killed most likely exceeds what is currently known, the mass 'disappearances' most likely claimed thousands more. Not to mention the suffering and mass abject poverty instilled by his 'free market' policies.

Way to put words in my mouth, troll.

Exactly right, the US pretty much killed those people with their tax dollars.

Irrelevant to the issue of Castro. You're obfuscating.

not that the governments they replaced did the same and often worse...revolutionaries usually represent the people being oppressed by corrupt and tyrannical governments...if it were not for dictatorships revolutionaries wouldn't have any support from the population and the revolution would fail...

And this justifies their crimes after the revolution, and the hero-worship they receive in spite of these crimes?

But of course he was justified killing all those people just because they were suspected 'leftists' and the US conservatives don't like their ideology, right...

And in reality the number of those he killed most likely exceeds what is currently known, the mass 'disappearances' most likely claimed thousands more. Not to mention the suffering and mass abject poverty instilled by his 'free market' policies.

Straw man fallacy.

Perhaps his delusional begging for the Soviet theater commanders to fire their nuclear tipped FROG Missiles at Miami in 1962?

In the event of a US invasion, you seem to forget. Soviet doctrine, I believe, would have been to launch it's missiles in the event of an invasion that threatened it's nuclear stocks. Which would have happened in the event of a US invasion anyway since local commanders when interviewed stated that they had complete jurisdiction over their SRBMs, just not their MRBMs.

I think the Che Guevara thing has something to do with Mandy Patinkin in Evita. Or, it does for me, at least. Beyond that, I think we just all need some sort of hero figure in our life, someone to put on T-shirts and name our Ipods after. Within socialism, it's hard to find a prominent figure who didn't do at least a few things wrong.

Don't even get me started on Eva Peron. Ugh.

Fact check! Castro didn't bother talking to the Soviet Union until he got snubbed by the US. In fact, he was trying to work out a deal with the US.

This has been a community service by your local generalite. Fighting ignorance and delusions one fact at a time.

Unlikely. Castro had been a communist since at least 1948. Read Red Star Over Cuba by Nathaniel Weyl and The Fourth Floor by Earl E.T. Smith.

They're romantic (as in the style, not the crappy novels with Fabio on the front) heroes. Dashing revolutionaries, coming out of the bush to overthrow a corrupt and tyrranical government. What's not to love about them?

They created a parody of a socialist regime with a parody of a worker's revolt that carried vanguardism to absurd extremes from which even Lenin would have shied, and went on to support a series of imitations in the rest of Latin America, all of which failed miserably in entirely predictable manners.

That is, until you realize that they lined some 10,000 people up against walls, declared them "counterrevolutionaries" and shot them.

That too.

In the event of a US invasion, you seem to forget. Soviet doctrine, I believe, would have been to launch it's missiles in the event of an invasion that threatened it's nuclear stocks. Which would have happened in the event of a US invasion anyway since local commanders when interviewed stated that they had complete jurisdiction over their SRBMs, just not their MRBMs.

He wanted the launch regardless of a US invasion. If I recall correctly, it's LaFeber who details this little incident pretty nicely.

Hell, he wanted Khruschev to fire off a first strike with the IRBM and MRBM forces in Cuba, rather than withdraw the missiles.

Well given most of the people he jailed were US mercenaries or supporters, or those sympathetic to the invasion, some could say he was maybe justified. Given the massive amounts of CIA assassination attempts on him and his government, cutting Cuba's economy off from the rest of the world.

They created a parody of a socialist regime with a parody of a worker's revolt that carried vanguardism to absurd extremes from which even Lenin would have shied, and went on to support a series of imitations in the rest of Latin America, all of which failed miserably in entirely predictable manners.


Excellent summation of a left opposition to Mr. Castro.

Thank you.

He wanted the launch regardless of a US invasion. If I recall correctly, it's LaFeber who details this little incident pretty nicely.

Hell, he wanted Khruschev to fire off a first strike with the IRBM and MRBM forces in Cuba, rather than withdraw the missiles.

Please source, and be quick about it.

Unlikely. Castro had been a communist since at least 1948. Read Red Star Over Cuba by Nathaniel Weyl and The Fourth Floor by Earl E.T. Smith.

And the visit to Washington was all a fabrication right? And his snubbing, and subsequent contacting of the USSR was just a conspiracy? It's all documented right there. He may have had socialist leanings, but the fact remains that he wanted to work out a deal with the US, and remain on friendly terms with them.

Except they didn't like that.

Well given most of the people he jailed were US mercenaries or supporters, or those sympathetic to the invasion, some could say he was maybe justified. Given the massive amounts of CIA assassination attempts on him and his government, cutting Cuba's economy off from the rest of the world.

Cut off from the western world, mind you. They received a rather large amount of benefit from East-bloc states up until the late eighties.

He wanted the launch regardless of a US invasion. If I recall correctly, it's LaFeber who details this little incident pretty nicely.

Hell, he wanted Khruschev to fire off a first strike with the IRBM and MRBM forces in Cuba, rather than withdraw the missiles.

Sources on this? Documentation on the Cuban Missile Crisis specifically states that Castro wanted a launch if the US invaded. Khrushchev was uncertain about that as Cuba, despite being communist, was not a significant part of the Bloc worth risking nuclear war over.

Please source, and be quick about it.

LaFeber, Walter. American Century: A History of the United States Since 1890's. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997

I'm sorry that I must give you an academic citation, but the interwebs ain't good for linking to textbooks. I believe I recall this correctly, although I cannot cite directly as I sold the book back to SBX about two weeks ago.

I believe Lenin and Che are cultural communist icons, and represent equality.

How the fuck can a person simultaneously be an icon and represent equality?

Not to mention the stupidity of making either of those figures out to be radical egalitarians.

Beyond that, I think we just all need some sort of hero figure in our life, someone to put on T-shirts and name our Ipods after.

We do? I don't know, I've done fine without one.

Unlikely. Castro had been a communist since at least 1948.

True, but his revolution wasn't explicitly communist until after it had won.

Cut off from the western world, mind you. They received a rather large amount of benefit from East-bloc states up until the late eighties.

That does not diminish socialism or his state, simply it proves the point that every country in the world does not have every good or service they require, do you think even the US would survive an EU blockade?


Plus you are assuming both the Eastern and Western blocs, if such a silly term can be applied, were two coherent and unitary wholes, which is patently false.
Does not Canada and others trade with Cuba today?
In fact I think like the US and Israel (lol, figures) are the only people still supporting it in the UN I think.

Ideological hatred looses.

That does not diminish socialism or his state, simply it proves the point that every country in the world does not have every good or service they require, do you think even the US would survive an EU blockade?


Plus you are assuming both the Eastern and Western blocs, if such a silly term can be applied, were two coherent and unitary wholes, which is patently false.
Does not Canada and others trade with Cuba today?
In fact I think like the US and Israel (lol, figures) are the only people still supporting it in the UN I think.

Ideological hatred looses.

You made the claim that the US Embargo cut Cuba off from the rest of the world. I clearly refuted that point, as does much of your post.

I've got to be at work in four and a half hours. Good night

You made the claim that the US Embargo cut Cuba off from the rest of the world. I clearly refuted that point, as does much of your post.

Well at the height of the Cold War and following the blocs collapse it would not be expected, but these days Cuba is doing quite well economically because other countries (apart from the US) are trading with them.

Just because the US has goods and services which Cuba needs, it does not mean either government or ideology is correct, nor should have the Cuban people been punished for trying to establish more proportionate distribution of wealth and assets. This can be applied also to the entire communist bloc.

Fact remains, every citizen of Cuba has free top rate healthcare and social support from the cradle to the grave, can the US make such a boast?

And the visit to Washington was all a fabrication right? And his snubbing, and subsequent contacting of the USSR was just a conspiracy? It's all documented right there. He may have had socialist leanings, but the fact remains that he wanted to work out a deal with the US, and remain on friendly terms with them.

Except they didn't like that.

True. You lose, Congo-Kinshasa

That's bull and you know it.

At that time, the USSR was pumping millions of Rubles (at a net loss, I might add) into the Cuban economy every single day.

I nearly gagged reading this.

Rubles were worth what? fuck all...

"nearly gagged"!..how nice choke on this then...Ronald Reagan during his term in office was responsible for 200,000 deaths from US financed terrorism, as a killer Castro was an amateur in comparison...

any state when threatened by an outside force will curtail freedoms and revert to a police state in order to survive when nessecary...Cuba correctly believed the US intended to undermine and destroy it...

Rubles were worth what? fuck all...

"nearly gagged"!..how nice choke on this then...Ronald Reagan during his term in office was responsible for 200,000 deaths from US financed terrorism, as a killer Castro was an amateur in comparison...

any state when threatened by an outside force will curtail freedoms and revert to a police state in order to survive when nessecary...Cuba correctly believed the US intended to undermine and destroy it...

Exactly right, people here are forgetting that the US invaded Cuba.

In the event of a US invasion, you seem to forget. Soviet doctrine, I believe, would have been to launch it's missiles in the event of an invasion that threatened it's nuclear stocks. Which would have happened in the event of a US invasion anyway since local commanders when interviewed stated that they had complete jurisdiction over their SRBMs, just not their MRBMs.

not quite-Robert McNamara Sec of Defense said that he learned many years later that the Cubans did have ultimate control, communications are not what they are today, Moscow did not have instant contact and Castro did have the ability to launch...and Castro told him he would have launched had Cuba been invaded regardless of the consequences(annihilation)

not quite-Robert McNamara Sec of Defense said that he learned many years later that the Cubans did have ultimate control, communications are not what they are today, Moscow did not have instant contact and Castro did have the ability to launch...and Castro told him he would have launched had Cuba been invaded regardless of the consequences(annihilation)
Well either way, they would only have launched if the US invaded, which is fair enough, self defense.

not quite-Robert McNamara Sec of Defense said that he learned many years later that the Cubans did have ultimate control, communications are not what they are today, Moscow did not have instant contact and Castro did have the ability to launch...and Castro told him he would have launched had Cuba been invaded regardless of the consequences(annihilation)

Well, this ties in with my main point, in which there would have been a launch, but only in the event of an invasion. And from what I do know, the only nuclear missiles there at the time, MRBMs and SRBMs, were under command of Soviet local commanders on loan to Cuba at the time. Castro didn't have direct authority.

And the visit to Washington was all a fabrication right? And his snubbing, and subsequent contacting of the USSR was just a conspiracy? It's all documented right there. He may have had socialist leanings, but the fact remains that he wanted to work out a deal with the US, and remain on friendly terms with them.

Except they didn't like that.

A lot of leftist dictators kiss up to the U.S. after coming to power. They might oppose the U.S., but they don't hesitate to ask for our money.

Well either way, they would only have launched if the US invaded, which is fair enough, self defense.

yea...it surprising how much ignorance this is regarding the Cuban crisis, McNamara who was at the heart of the crisis was quite informative so why is there so much misinformation still?...USSR put the missiles in Cuba as a counter to the US missiles in Turkey, no attack on the USA was planned it was purely defensiv...and Castro had no intention of attacking the USA unless Cuba was attacked first..

How the fuck can a person simultaneously be an icon and represent equality?

He can't.

True, but his revolution wasn't explicitly communist until after it had won.

There were non-communists in the movement, but communists held the real power.

A lot of leftist dictators kiss up to the U.S. after coming to power. They might oppose the U.S., but they don't hesitate to ask for our money.

Castro didn't need US money, he got it from the Soviets.

yea...it surprising how much ignorance this is regarding the Cuban crisis, McNamara who was at the heart of the crisis was quite informative so why is there so much misinformation still?...USSR put the missiles in Cuba as a counter to the US missiles in Turkey, no attack on the USA was planned it was purely defensiv...and Castro had no intention of attacking the USA unless Cuba was attacked first..

What good is fact when you can spin like the US can...

A lot of leftist dictators kiss up to the U.S. after coming to power. They might oppose the U.S., but they don't hesitate to ask for our money.

He primarily wanted our support. He greatly admired the US revolution. He only became a soviet puppet after we rejected him.

He primarily wanted our support. He greatly admired the US revolution. He only became a soviet puppet after we rejected him.

It's true that he only became a puppet after we rejected him, but he was a hard-core communist long before then, since at least 1948 (the year of the Bogatazo uprising).

He primarily wanted our support. He greatly admired the US revolution. He only became a soviet puppet after we rejected him.

Sounds alot like Ho Chi Minh.

It's true that he only became a puppet after we rejected him, but he was a hard-core communist long before then, since at least 1948 (the year of the Bogatazo uprising).

Your definition of "hardcore communist" is anyone to the left of Clinton.

Sounds alot like Ho Chi Minh.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

He primarily wanted our support. He greatly admired the US revolution. He only became a soviet puppet after we rejected him.

Castro's annoyed the USA by nationalizing several oil companies...Castro did so when they refused to refine Soviet Oil, the Soviets agreed to buy Cuban Sugar with Oil so it's not surprising the companies were nationalized...

ITT also lost interests in Cuba through nationalization,..ITT is widely believed to be very much involved in the coup that put Pinochet in power after Chile nationalized ITT there as well...

Castro's annoyed the USA by nationalizing several oil companies...Castro did so when they refused to refine Soviet Oil, the Soviets agreed to buy Cuban Sugar with Oil so it's not surprising the companies were nationalized...

ITT also lost interests in Cuba through nationalization,..ITT is widely believed to be very much involved in the coup that put Pinochet in power after Chile nationalized ITT there as well...

Well it's their oil, so yeah, its fine...

A lot of leftist dictators kiss up to the U.S. after coming to power. They might oppose the U.S., but they don't hesitate to ask for our money.

A lot of those dictators were generally put into power by the US itself. And that goes aside from the point, in which Castro tried to align himself to the US, but the US rejected him, so he went to the Soviets instead. The US only has it's heads of states to blame for how things turned out.

Do they still believe that they will be in power some day in the future and accepted as liberators? Because it does not seem consistent with reality.
Sure they will drop flowers at their feet, it will be a cakewalk, there will be a "Mission acomplished" Banner and everything.


3) Comparing Castro to Pinochet is not a Strawman. In fact, from an objective point of view, Castro is probably worse.

I'd have to say comparing how long Castro has reigned compared to Pinochet, when it comes to damage per time in office, Pinochet beats him.

At least Castro kept an enconmy, (Sure a poor one but one none the less) while Pinochet destroyed all the national industry to give it to US and other countries, not to mention I doubt Castro allowed his soldiers free reign to publicly kill 'enemies' right and left.

Rubles were worth what? fuck all...
They didn't literally give Cuba money, instead they sent machinery and resources. It was valued in rubles, which for Soviet exchange were changeable at a set rate.

"nearly gagged"!..how nice choke on this then...Ronald Reagan during his term in office was responsible for 200,000 deaths from US financed terrorism, as a killer Castro was an amateur in comparison...
Obfuscation.

any state when threatened by an outside force will curtail freedoms and revert to a police state in order to survive when nessecary...Cuba correctly believed the US intended to undermine and destroy it...

And this makes it's actions right, how?

At least Castro kept an enconmy, (Sure a poor one but one none the less) while Pinochet destroyed all the national industry to give it to US and other countries, not to mention I doubt Castro allowed his soldiers free reign to publicly kill 'enemies' right and left.

No, Mr. Castro was a better PR man than that, he had people taken into back alleys and prisons, then had them shot.

revolting, Castro at least attempted to transform Cuba from a cesspool for American businessmen to indulge in their excesses, at least attempted to liberate Cuba from foreign ownership of its industries, which is more than can be said for any of the insignificants waiting to celebrate his death.

He primarily wanted our support. He greatly admired the US revolution. He only became a soviet puppet after we rejected him.

And he expected an open-arms welcome from Eisenhower and Nixon, just as the campaign season was heating up. He came in April of 1959, as Kennedy was beginning to hammer away at the Eisenhower administration for being soft on communism. The last thing Nixon needed was for that image to be reinforced by meeting with this individual who was widely seen, whether justifiably or not, as a tool of the Soviets.

You see, unlike Mr. Castro, Nixon and Eisenhower governed a democracy, where if the people don't like what you're doing, they can toss you out of power.

yea...it surprising how much ignorance this is regarding the Cuban crisis, McNamara who was at the heart of the crisis was quite informative so why is there so much misinformation still?...USSR put the missiles in Cuba as a counter to the US missiles in Turkey, no attack on the USA was planned it was purely defensiv...and Castro had no intention of attacking the USA unless Cuba was attacked first..

First, why were the Jupiter Missiles placed in Turkey? As a counter to the overtly offensive armored force that the Soviets maintained poised to strike for the Fulda Gap in Germany.

This fact, combined with the improved First Strike capability of the missiles the Soviets had in Cuba, the fact that the Jupiters were not capable of a First Strike, the Secret Nature of the weapons buildup, and the rhetoric coming from Khruschev are more than enough to really scare the United States, and knowing that we didn't have a direct line to Khruschev's brain, we can only interperet the signals that he'd send us through his actions.

And we interepereted these signals as meaning "First Strike"

Obfuscation.



And this makes it's actions right, how?

how easy is it for you to point fingers at another countries leader and condemn them while completely ignoring your own leaders crimes...Castro's excesses pale in comparison to the trail of bodies left by US Presidents...hypocrisy seems to be a trait perfected by americans...

First, why were the Jupiter Missiles placed in Turkey? As a counter to the overtly offensive armored force that the Soviets maintained poised to strike for the Fulda Gap in Germany.

This fact, combined with the improved First Strike capability of the missiles the Soviets had in Cuba, the fact that the Jupiters were not capable of a First Strike, the Secret Nature of the weapons buildup, and the rhetoric coming from Khruschev are more than enough to really scare the United States, and knowing that we didn't have a direct line to Khruschev's brain, we can only interperet the signals that he'd send us through his actions.

And we interepereted these signals as meaning "First Strike"

Just to clarify the point about the Jupiter missiles not being capible of a first strike. The missiles were liquid fueled, meaning that they could only be fueled directly prior to launch. And it took upwards of 4 hours to fill and pressurize the fuel tanks. In the event of war, Russian Missiles or Strategic Bombers could have hit these lightly defended missiles long before the Jupiters would have the ability to launch.

I know I'll be celebrating when GWB dies.

I know I'll be celebrating when GWB dies.

And will your city officially endorse these celebrations?

Probably not.

And will your city officially endorse these celebrations?

Probably not.

Probably depends on whether they live in New Orleans...

Just to clarify the point about the Jupiter missiles not being capible of a first strike. The missiles were liquid fueled, meaning that they could only be fueled directly prior to launch. And it took upwards of 4 hours to fill and pressurize the fuel tanks. In the event of war, Russian Missiles or Strategic Bombers could have hit these lightly defended missiles long before the Jupiters would have the ability to launch.

by that reasoning that would make them a first strike missile as they would have no opportunity to be used as a 2nd strike...the soviet missiles in Cuba it should be noted did not have warheads on them, as a safety procedure the warheads were kept a considerable distance away to prevent an accidental launch of nukes by a local commander...

When Pinochet died, there were also unofficial parties. You know, random street parties. mybe organised by some of the people attending them.

This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

Who cares? It's in a different country, about someone is not particularly well-liked by certain people.

However, there are flaws in your reasoning.

First, if there was an "official" Kennedy-death party in Cuba, it would necessarily implicate the Cuban government in a move that would be decidedly political and would be taken as a substantial mistake in foreign policy relations with the US, such as they are.

Second, the totalitarian regime that seized power under Castro in 1954? resulted in the displacement, deaths, and hardship of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Cuban citizens. Many of these formerly oppressed citizens are residing in the US currently, where they enjoy the right to be able to make public demonstrations against the person who represents their suffering and that of their friends and family.

Whether it is right or not is irrelevant; because they have the right and the reason and exercise it is all that matters.

by that reasoning that would make them a first strike missile as they would have no opportunity to be used as a 2nd strike...the soviet missiles in Cuba it should be noted did not have warheads on them, as a safety procedure the warheads were kept a considerable distance away to prevent an accidental launch of nukes by a local commander...

For Castro's detractors on these fora, a "considerable distance away" translates to "within easy distance". There's no winning with them, and all they're looking forward to is for Havana to become yet another cookie-cutter discount vacation spot for Americans to completely and utterly ruin for the rest of us, with their usual thoroughgoing lack of style and grace.

And will your city officially endorse these celebrations?

Probably not.

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

Were they too subtle?

For Castro's detractors on these fora, a "considerable distance away" translates to "within easy distance". There's no winning with them, and all they're looking forward to is for Havana to become yet another cookie-cutter discount vacation spot for Americans to completely and utterly ruin for the rest of us, with their usual thoroughgoing lack of style and grace.

"considerable distance" if I recall correctly with all the checks, balances and safety protocols translates to about 6 hrs...

Were they too subtle?

ha, apparently.
I had to clarify that such an illogical comparison was actually being put forth...

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

Why not? Bush isn't the leader of my country - he certainly doesn't warrant being thought of as a sacred cow, not in my books.

ha, apparently.
I had to clarify that such an illogical comparison was actually being put forth...

Bush is a leader.

Castro is a leader.

Where's the illogic?

Why not? Bush isn't the leader of my country - he certainly doesn't warrant being thought of as a sacred cow, not in my books.

I'm sure there were more than a few celebrations in Central America when Reagan died...I know I wasn't disappointed...

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

Dobbs put it best.

And yes.

I don't like George W. You don't like Castro. I don't support officially celebrating the death of either.

I'm sure there were more than a few celebrations in Central America when Reagan died...I know I wasn't disappointed...

There is a difference between tacit municipal approval of a death (wink wink, nudge nudge), and full-on endorsement (we're going to fund this!).

There is a difference between tacit municipal approval of a death (wink wink, nudge nudge), and full-on endorsement (we're going to fund this!).

And fat chance these anti-Castro, pro-Bush dupes'll even begin to understand that difference, or at least admit as much. Though they'd certainly spend quite a long while venting spleen if the shoe was on the other foot, to be sure.

There is a difference between tacit municipal approval of a death (wink wink, nudge nudge), and full-on endorsement (we're going to fund this!).

approval of the terror war was fully endorsed just not admitted, so no I don't agree

approval of the terror war was fully endorsed just not admitted, so no I don't agree

Pardon? Before I reply, could you elaborate? I don't want to take this out of context by accident.

And we're all going to go there. Repeatedly.

Feel free to go somewhere else. :D

There are already quite a few US citizens prowling around Cuba. I met four last time I was there. Outnumbered by Canuks and Europeans so far, but still a presence, and rather welcome actually.

Miami is full of Douchebags.

Gusanos. Full of gusanos.

Pardon? Before I reply, could you elaborate? I don't want to take this out of context by accident.

hmm...possibly I misunderstood your post... elaborate on your's first...

hmm...possibly I misunderstood your post... elaborate on your's first...

I'm saying that just providing tacit approval to the celebration of a group of citizens within a city is one thing...granting the license for a parade, or whatever. But a city coming right out and saying, 'this is our political position, we are going to celebrate this person's death' is really pushing it. For one...not every denizen of Miami is rabidly anti-Castro, as amazing as that may seem. So why should the city of Miami choose to represent all of its citizens as such?

It's frankly disgusting. It's a political position a municipality...a county, a state, a province a COUNTRY...that should not be taken.

This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

You mean they don't like Ted either? :p

Sorry that I have not been around to mainitain my thread.

A few things:

Comparing Castro to Pinochet is idiocy. Pinochet had the open support of the US and UK government and military when he came to power.
Castro had the support of the majority of inpoverished Cubans.

Cuba has been under overt and covert attack since the revolution in 1949, and continues to be.
http://www.radiohc.cu/ingles/especiales/noviembre06/especiales13nov.htm
http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/patriotas2/escalaing/terroring1.htm
Chile was never attacked by anyone except impoverished Chileans.

Obviously, Pinochet and Castro had totally different obstacles to maintaining power. Consequently, they probably had different methods of counteracting these obstacles.

For all the people who are discussing the US/Cuban Missile Crisis, this is not pertinent to this thread. Please take your hijack elsewhere.

And everyone who wants to discuss Cuban history should provide sources. Both sides seem incapable of this right now.

I am not questioning the rights of the people of Miami to do this. I am merely pointing out that the USians who support this and their municipal government are tacky, despicable ghouls.

No, 80 miles from Miami is great...once we negotiate a few border laws, day trips to Cuba could become a reality.

and you think the Cuban people will welcome you, especially after your tax dollars paid for a party to celebrate their leaders death?

americans will be as popular as cancer in Cuba long after Castro dies.

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

why is it illogical?

how would the US as a country react if the shoe was on the other foot?

remember how hot and bothered you got when Palestinains were show celebrating 9/11? and that footage was fake too...

Come on people. Are we seriously comparing a celebration of the death of a foreign dictator to that of a president?

Why the hell shouldn't we?

Bush is almost certainly responsible for far more deaths than Castro.

Bush is a leader.

Castro is a leader.

Where's the illogic?

It's illogical if you are a citizen of the United States. Clearly, you are not. What the heck do I care if you have a celebration in a foreign country?

It's illogical if you are a citizen of the United States. Clearly, you are not. What the heck do I care if you have a celebration in a foreign country?

What a cop-out.

Talk to the elbow, the hand is busy.

And fat chance these anti-Castro, pro-Bush dupes'll even begin to understand that difference, or at least admit as much. Though they'd certainly spend quite a long while venting spleen if the shoe was on the other foot, to be sure.

Interesting...cause that it exactly what I have been saying...oh right, you choose only to read 1 post out of context. Good for you, keep talking.

What a cop-out.

Talk to the elbow, the hand is busy.

How unintelligent. Must be nice being in second grade...

and you think the Cuban people will welcome you, especially after your tax dollars paid for a party to celebrate their leaders death?

americans will be as popular as cancer in Cuba long after Castro dies.

Money talks a lot louder than any celebration. They'll forget about that whole Castro thing once we start spending billions of dollars in their country.

It's illogical if you are a citizen of the United States.

Why?

How unintelligent. Must be nice being in second grade...

Well, as a teacher, I learned to tailor my speech to the intellectual level of my audience. I'm pretty good at judging what that is. Given the tenor of your dismissal, I'm sure it was appropriate.

Well, as a teacher, I learned to tailor my speech to the intellectual level of my audience. I'm pretty good at judging what that is. Given the tenor of your dismissal, I'm sure it was appropriate.

;) Touche.

Why?

To have a sponsored party by a city of the United States celebrating the death of a president of said United States is illogical in the context of this debate. If you need me to explain further, let me know.

Second, it is illogical to compare the two if you are a citizen of the US because those doing the celebration of Castro's death do not live in Cuba. If you are not a citizen of the US, go ahead and celebrate, as long as your out of the country. You see any death celebrations in Cuba? No? My point stands.

To have a sponsored party by a city of the United States celebrating the death of a president of said United States is illogical.

Sounds perfectly logical to me, if you really hate said president.

Second, it is illogical to compare the two if you are a citizen of the US because those doing the celebration of Castro's death do not live in Cuba.

So? Why is that a relevant distinction?

You see any death celebrations in Cuba? No? My point stands.

No, it doesn't. There are plenty of other possible reasons for that other than "it's illogical."

Sounds perfectly logical to me, if you really hate said president.

No, it is illogical for it to be sponsored by a city. Read the argument, don't work around the point; if you can't answer it, say so. Better to be silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth (or type) and remove all doubt.



So? Why is that a relevant distinction?

Hmm, maybe because that is what this thread is about...






No, it doesn't. There are plenty of other possible reasons for that other than "it's illogical."

Okay, look. It is illogical. All other reasons reinforce the illogicality. Make sense? No, probably not, considering the content of your response. Right then, it's like this. There are no celebrations celebrating the death of Castro in Cuba. The celebration is being held in a foreign country. Follow me so far? the fact there is no celebration in Cuba, for whatever reason you or anyone can come up with, merely reinforces the fact that such a celebration would, indeed, be illogical...just as it would be, in fact, illogical for an American city to celebrate the death of an American president. It won't happen; thus, it is illogical.

No, it is illogical for it to be sponsored by a city.

And, again, no, it isn't. Not if you (read: collective population of said city) really hate the president.

Hmm, maybe because that is what this thread is about...

No, it's about the bad taste of celebrating death in general. I don't think any distinction between people in a foreign country celebrating the death of a leader and people in the leader's country celebrating the death of the leader was made until you made it.

Okay, look. It is illogical. All other reasons reinforce the illogicality. Make sense? No, probably not, considering the content of your response.

You need to learn to make coherent arguments. You aren't very good at it.

Right then, it's like this. There are no celebrations celebrating the death of Castro in Cuba.

Castro isn't dead.

The celebration is being held in a foreign country.

So?

Follow me so far?

Yes.

the fact there is no celebration in Cuba, for whatever reason you or anyone can come up with, merely reinforces the fact that such a celebration would, indeed, be illogical...

No, it doesn't. For instance, if the reason that nobody will celebrate Castro's death in Cuba were that everyone loves him there, it would be totally irrelevant to any claim of illogicity.

It won't happen; thus, it is illogical.

Now that is illogical.

Who cares? It's in a different country, about someone is not particularly well-liked by certain people.

However, there are flaws in your reasoning.

First, if there was an "official" Kennedy-death party in Cuba, it would necessarily implicate the Cuban government in a move that would be decidedly political and would be taken as a substantial mistake in foreign policy relations with the US, such as they are.

But if Miami does it, does it not necessarily implicate the US government in a move that would be decidedly political and would be taken as a substantial mistake in foreign policy relations with Cuba, such as they are?

I would argue that it does.

Second, the totalitarian regime that seized power under Castro in 1954? resulted in the displacement, deaths, and hardship of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Cuban citizens. Many of these formerly oppressed citizens are residing in the US currently, where they enjoy the right to be able to make public demonstrations against the person who represents their suffering and that of their friends and family.

Whether it is right or not is irrelevant; because they have the right and the reason and exercise it is all that matters.

It was in 1959. Your inability to even remember the year the Cuban revolution occured makes me wonder if any of the other facts you claim in this post are even vaguely true.

But you are correct that the citizens of Miami have the right to party in the streets. No one is claiming otherwise. I think it is ghoulish and a measure of the horrible arrogance that the US has in regards to Latin America.

To have a sponsored party by a city of the United States celebrating the death of a president of said United States is illogical in the context of this debate. If you need me to explain further, let me know.

Second, it is illogical to compare the two if you are a citizen of the US because those doing the celebration of Castro's death do not live in Cuba. If you are not a citizen of the US, go ahead and celebrate, as long as your out of the country. You see any death celebrations in Cuba? No? My point stands.

you are doing a rain man impression.

the point as you well know it would be the fury if, for example, Caracas organised and funded a party celebratung the death of a US president.

its in poor taste, innapropriate and portrays a very poor image of miami abroad that this official party is allowed

When Pinochet died, there were also unofficial parties. You know, random street parties. mybe organised by some of the people attending them.

This is the City of Miami. An official municipality. How comfortable would US citizens feel if Havana had an official "Kenndey is Dead!" day?

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised. For that matter, if Chav(e with an accent)z is still in power when Bush dies, I fully expect him to organize wild street parties.

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised. For that matter, if Chav(e with an accent)z is still in power when Bush dies, I fully expect him to organize wild street parties.

Im not asking would you be surprised. Im asking how would you react

Im not asking would you be surprised. Im asking how would you react

How would I react? Probably say 'those wacky commies are at it again! We should stop trading them immediately. Oh. Wait.'

Well, I certainly won't be unhappy when Castro kicks the bucket (pity he didn't die sooner, tbh), but I don't intent to be overly happy. Dying isn't a good thing, ever.

However, I may celebrate the liberation of the Cuban people from tyrants and murderers, if Raul doesn't follow in his dear le- er brother's footsteps.

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised. For that matter, if Chav(e with an accent)z is still in power when Bush dies, I fully expect him to organize wild street parties.

I think that Chavez would not commemorate a special celebration to commemorate a US Presidents death. He would have done so when Geral Ford died.

But here's the difference: Venezuela hasn't spent the last 45 years or so vilifying a US President, so I don't think the Venezuelans would swallow such a huge pile of horseshit.

Castro is dead?

Castro is dead?

No.

Castro is dead?

No, but Miami is already buying the party favours!

No.

Wouldn't it be funny if the Cubans had held out on us and put Castro in a robotic exoskeleton that greatly extended his lifespan and he destroyed Miami?

Alcoholism is the only disease you can get yelled at for having

dammit otto, your an alcoholic!

dammit otto, you have lupus!

Wouldn't it be funny if the Cubans had held out on us and put Castro in a robotic exoskeleton that greatly extended his lifespan and he destroyed Miami?

Kaiju Castro attacks Miami during his own funeral festivities! Thousands of Cuban exiles flee in panic! Again!

Kaiju Castro attacks Miami during his own funeral festivities! Thousands of Cuban exiles flee in panic! Again!

I would watch it.

yes castro's dead! he's dead dead dead! As dead as the vicker's machine gun and the piece of pie i left in my pants last nite!

yes castro's dead! he's dead dead dead! As dead as the vicker's machine gun and the piece of pie i left in my pants last nite!

He's not dead. Although you just put on a nice performance for us.

Wouldn't it be funny if the Cubans had held out on us and put Castro in a robotic exoskeleton that greatly extended his lifespan and he destroyed Miami?

Yeah that's a real knee-slapper.

Celebrating death is on the morbid side, but if he is to be celebrated for one accomplishment it would be dying.

Yeah that's a real knee-slapper.

I thought so too.

Celebrating death is on the morbid side, but if he is to be celebrated for one accomplishment it would be dying.

...........eh?

Talk about a back handed compliment.

I think that Chavez would not commemorate a special celebration to commemorate a US Presidents death. He would have done so when Geral Ford died.

But here's the difference: Venezuela hasn't spent the last 45 years or so vilifying a US President, so I don't think the Venezuelans would swallow such a huge pile of horseshit.

Chav(e with an accent)z has certainly been making up for lost time.

And besides, I'm not saying an US President, I'm saying Bush, the guy who he got up in front of the UN and called the devil.

ROBO CASTRO TO THE RESCUE!

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q79/Dudukain/robocastro.jpg

I have too much time.

I thought so too.
Yes, all we'd need then is a necromancer to reanimate Pinochet's corpse.

http://www.nascr.net/~jcburd/lich.jpg

We can spend the rest of eternity embroiled in war between a megalomaniac robot and a conservative Lich. Good times. :)

Yes, all we'd need then is a necromancer to reanimate Pinochet's corpse.

http://www.nascr.net/~jcburd/lich.jpg

We can spend the rest of eternity embroiled in war between a megalomaniac robot and a conservative Lich. Good times. :)


That would kick ass.

No.
Alright cool, no worries yet.

Chav(e with an accent)z has certainly been making up for lost time.

And besides, I'm not saying an US President, I'm saying Bush, the guy who he got up in front of the UN and called the devil.

Chávez? I don't think he would but that's neither here nor there. Castro never did. Unfortunately, the Miami government could not return the favour.

So, while I can understand many people are not supportive of Castro, or the Cuban Revolution, I think we can all agree that this is simply disgusting.

Imagine if the Cubans had held a death party every time a POTUS died?



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070129.wmiamicuba0129/BNStory/International/home
I think it's because many of those people had their lives ruined by Castro's regime.

But hey, whatever for the proletariat, eh comrade?

ROBO CASTRO TO THE RESCUE!

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q79/Dudukain/robocastro.jpg

I have too much time.

Yes, all we'd need then is a necromancer to reanimate Pinochet's corpse.

http://www.nascr.net/~jcburd/lich.jpg

We can spend the rest of eternity embroiled in war between a megalomaniac robot and a conservative Lich. Good times. :)
That would be seven angles to sweet.

Either way, now we can get rid of that God-awful economic embargo.

I think it's because many of those people had their lives ruined by Castro's regime.

But hey, whatever for the proletariat, eh comrade?

I will repeat myself again, apparently: people are entirely in their right to party for any reason they want. However, the City of Miami, in an official capacity, should not be celebrating the death of anyone. It's fucking ghoulish and rude.

Not to mention that if Cuba tried to have a Bush is Dead celebration, the USA would feel the need to "liberate" Cuba again. Mind you, the USA would probabaly fail. Again.

Since the leaders of the world dont care what happens in Cuba,
since it is content to deal with the Cuban dictatorship government forever,
we Cuban American exiles have nothing to loose and every right to party
the death of Fidel Castro whenever that HP - SOB dies, no matter if nothing changes in Cuba.

Hope when he dies, he rots and burns in hell where he belongs.

We will party like its 1999,
we will party like its 2006,
we will party like its 2007,
as it is. its our right to Party.

La Isla Bonita,
Celebrate good times come on.

Fidel Dies and goes to Heaven :

Fidel dies and goes to heaven. When he gets there, St. Peter tells him
that he is not on the list and that no way in hell, no how, does he belong in heaven. Fidel must go to hell.

So Fidel goes to hell where Satan gives him
a hearty welcome and tells him to make himself at home.

Then Fidel notices that he left his luggage in heaven and tells Satan, who says, "No hay problema, I'll send a couple of little devils to get your stuff."

When the little devils get to heaven they find the gates are locked -
St.Peter is having lunch - and they start debating what to do. Finally,
one comes up with the idea that they should go over the wall and get the luggage.

As they are climbing the wall, two little angels see them, and one angel says to the other, "My goodness! - Godness! Fidel has been in hell no more than ten minutes and we're already getting refugees!"

its our right to Party.


Not with my tax money, you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by La Habana Cuba
its our right to Party.

Not with my tax money, you do.

LOl, I am sure they will charge admission to cover the expense costs,
do you live in Miami?

LOl, I am sure they will charge admission to cover the expense costs,


Uh huh. Why don't I believe you?


do you live in Miami?

Before you ask that, you should ask non-Cuban's in Miami this. Would you mind having your taxes being spent on a party that you may not agree with?

Roads, hospitals, police, emergency services, education, I can agree with things like that. But for hosting parties? No way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by La Habana Cuba
its our right to Party.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Non Aligned States
Not with my tax money, you do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by La Habana Cuba
LOl, I am sure they will charge admission to cover the expense costs $ .

[QUOTE=Non Aligned States;12274606]Uh huh. Why don't I believe you?

Before you ask that, you should ask non-Cuban's in Miami this. Would you mind having your taxes being spent on a party that you may not agree with?

Roads, hospitals, police, emergency services, education, I can agree with things like that. But for hosting parties? No way.

Posted by La Habana Cuba :
As long as the expense costs $ are coverd,
maybe even make a profit $, vendors of
hats, T Shirts, Food and other goods
will make a profit $.

But you do make a good point and post.

Gaah, fix your quoting LHC.

Gaah, fix your quoting LHC.

I wish I knew how to quote better NAS.

I think it's the Cubans proper who should be celebrating, their not the one's living in slums with no social support.

I think it's the Cubans proper who should be celebrating, their not the one's living in slums with no social support.

Good Night you all, I need to sleep for a while.

I think it's the Cubans proper who should be celebrating, their not the one's living in slums with no social support.

There's no stopping douchebaggery.

its our right to Party.
Not with my tax money, you do.

LOl, I am sure they will charge admission to cover the expense costs $ .

Uh huh. Why don't I believe you?

Before you ask that, you should ask non-Cuban's in Miami this. Would you mind having your taxes being spent on a party that you may not agree with?

Roads, hospitals, police, emergency services, education, I can agree with things like that. But for hosting parties? No way.

Posted by La Habana Cuba :
As long as the expense costs $ are coverd,
maybe even make a profit $, vendors of
hats, T Shirts, Food and other goods
will make a profit $.

But you do make a good point and post.

Buenos dias, La Habana, I was hoping you would stop by. I know you will be partying when Castro dies, and you know I will not. But I see you are still polite enough to concede that Miami tax dollars should not be spent on this.

A lot of leftist dictators kiss up to the U.S. after coming to power. They might oppose the U.S., but they don't hesitate to ask for our money.

name one?

How would I react? Probably say 'those wacky commies are at it again! We should stop trading them immediately. Oh. Wait.'

so the sort of childinsh behaviour miami is engaging in is worth of an economic embargo?

Since the leaders of the world dont care what happens in Cuba,
since it is content to deal with the Cuban dictatorship government forever,


we do, thats why we avoid terrorist supporting wackos like you.

But if Miami does it, does it not necessarily implicate the US government in a move that would be decidedly political and would be taken as a substantial mistake in foreign policy relations with Cuba, such as they are?

I would argue that it does.

No, it does not. Let me educate you on something you appear to be ignorant of: Cuba is ruled under a totalitarian government. No city could host a party without the express approval and sponsorship of the government; in the United States, a city may act independently of the central government.


It was in 1959. Your inability to even remember the year the Cuban revolution occured makes me wonder if any of the other facts you claim in this post are even vaguely true.

Okay kid. I recognized I didn't remember the date. I would suggest you learn to acknowledge when you are wrong--it goes a long way toward displaying maturity.

Second, learn the difference between facts and opinions. Your own responses may bear just that much more credibility.

But you are correct that the citizens of Miami have the right to party in the streets. No one is claiming otherwise. I think it is ghoulish and a measure of the horrible arrogance that the US has in regards to Latin America.

Indeed. Celebrating the demise of a oppressive dictator for the benefit of the people freed from his tyranny is justifiable, in my opinion.

Hey, NoRepublic...how many times have you been to Cuba?

If it would be privately funded, then it's their first ammendment right to have the party. Therefore I can't ethically object to the party. I am fully supportive of any and everyone who wants to excercise their first ammendment right.

Morally I'm torn on that issue. I'm all for Cuban refugees to throw a party, not sure either way on everyone else.

No, it does not. Let me educate you on something you appear to be ignorant of: Cuba is ruled under a totalitarian government. No city could host a party without the express approval and sponsorship of the government; in the United States, a city may act independently of the central government.

I am not so sure about that. here is an excerpt from a recent study looking at the relationship between municipalities and the central government:
In short, the new system was based on the need for a local representative institution, the Municipal Assembly (Asamblea Municipal), made up of delegates elected by the constituencies through direct and secret balloting. An Assembly had the power to elect, oversee and recall both executive (Executive Committees) and administrative agencies, as well as their representatives to the provincial assemblies and to the National Assembly, the foremost state bodies. Considering that citizens, as voters, had the power not only to elect but also to recall their delegates to municipal assemblies, the system amounted to a chain of successive subordinations in which delegation of sovereignty was conditional while its effects transcended the purely local arena. Voters’ recall rights were complemented by the obligation of those elected to be accountable to constituents and to submit to their scrutiny.

You can find that information here:
http://www.idrc.ca/fr/ev-54437-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
After reading the above, I found that it did not specifically mention whether or not the central government could forbid a municipality from having such a party. But even if they could, I don't think they would.

Oddly enough I can say the exact same thing about the USA: I don't know whether or not the central government could forbid a municipality from having such a party. But even if they could, I don't think they would.

Okay kid. I recognized I didn't remember the date. I would suggest you learn to acknowledge when you are wrong--it goes a long way toward displaying maturity.

Second, learn the difference between facts and opinions. Your own responses may bear just that much more credibility.

You are correct that admitting your errors and learning the difference between facts and opinions is mature and credible. My posts stand for what they are. Judge me by them as you will.

Indeed. Celebrating the demise of a oppressive dictator for the benefit of the people freed from his tyranny is justifiable, in my opinion.

Of course it would be justifiable in that context. But even if Castro is not an evil dictator, it is still justifiable. People have the right to party for whatever reason they want. I am not debating that. I am saying that this act is seen as an act of arrogance and barbarism by many people. I am one of them.

I am not so sure about that. here is an excerpt from a recent study looking at the relationship between municipalities and the central government:


You can find that information here:
http://www.idrc.ca/fr/ev-54437-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
After reading the above, I found that it did not specifically mention whether or not the central government could forbid a municipality from having such a party. But even if they could, I don't think they would.

Oddly enough I can say the exact same thing about the USA: I don't know whether or not the central government could forbid a municipality from having such a party. But even if they could, I don't think they would.



You are correct that admitting your errors and learning the difference between facts and opinions is mature and credible. My posts stand for what they are. Judge me by them as you will.



Of course it would be justifiable in that context. But even if Castro is not an evil dictator, it is still justifiable. People have the right to party for whatever reason they want. I am not debating that. I am saying that this act is seen as an act of arrogance and barbarism by many people. I am one of them.

This has been...enlightening. Thanks.

Hey, NoRepublic...how many times have you been to Cuba?

None. Why?

None. Why?

Then STFU.

You yapping about Cuba, and how Cubans live is as stupid as me yapping about the US and how people in the US live, based on what I think about George W. (which I don't by the way)

When you go to Cuba, and actually have a clue, THEN maybe we can have a discussion. Until then, read the first line of this post again.

Then STFU.

You yapping about Cuba, and how Cubans live is as stupid as me yapping about the US and how people in the US live, based on what I think about George W. (which I don't by the way) (I don't either)

When you go to Cuba, and actually have a clue, THEN maybe we can have a discussion. Until then, read the first line of this post again.

STFU? Perhaps you should listen to your own advice before making yourself sound like a fool.

Your argument would have merit were it in fact based on substantive evidence. I am not making any observation of the Cuban people based on their leader.

You have every right to make any uninformed opinion you wish to make, they are yours. I respect that. Obviously this is a point of contention for you. That's fine with me; I hope someday you will grow up and understand that people will disagree with you and express their disagreement. It's called discussion, debate, and its founded on mutual respect. If you wish to harangue me for my opinions because you force your own beliefs on what I say onto my words, then by all means, continue. I'll still be here listening.

Mommy and Daddy are fighting.:(

::hides::

STFU? Perhaps you should listen to your own advice before making yourself sound like a fool.

Your argument would have merit were it in fact based on substantive evidence. I am not making any observation of the Cuban people based on their leader.

Oh you aren't? Really.


Indeed. Celebrating the demise of a oppressive dictator for the benefit of the people freed from his tyranny is justifiable, in my opinion.

I realise you are talking about the Cuban exiles here, but you are also slathering that label of 'oppressed' on the rest of the Cuban people. Your reference to oppression, and tyranny indeed impose an observation on the Cuban people based on your perception of their leader. So again. STFU. Let the Cuban people themselves take the label of oppressed if they wish, go hear it from their own mouths. Talk to those actually LIVING in Cuba. You'll be shocked at how quickly your sympathy for 'the oppressed' gets laughed at.

I realise you are talking about the Cuban exiles here, but you are also slathering that label of 'oppressed' on the rest of the Cuban people. Your reference to oppression, and tyranny indeed impose an observation on the Cuban people based on your perception of their leader. So again. STFU. Let the Cuban people themselves take the label of oppressed if they wish, go hear it from their own mouths. Talk to those actually LIVING in Cuba. You'll be shocked at how quickly your sympathy for 'the oppressed' gets laughed at.

All things are relative.

From my perspective as a United States citizen, Castro is oppressive. Oppression can take many forms; you assume I am referring to his attitude toward the people. Where is the freedom of speech, the democratically elected government? If you live in a nation without such institutions, you are oppressed in relation to nations with freer societies.

Further, I hold no sympathy for anyone. I made remarks that delineated the fact that Castro is oppressive and a tyrant. Not that I felt sorry for them.

Hey man.... people celebrate the most wackiest things nowadays....