• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama shakes hands with Cuba's Castro in 'gesture of hope'

I've heard that argument before.

The problem with that argument are the multiple examples of aide and money sidetracked into the waiting arms of dictators in Africa. No matter what your'e still dealing with a Dictatorship who has control over the resources and given Castro's many examples of human cruelty it would be hard to justify giving him more power in any form or fashion.

If you lift the embargo and peoples lives improve, does that mean that the human rights violations stop ? Will people be given the freedom to select their own style of government or even the power to speak freely without the chance of jail or execution ?

Absolutely. Cuba still takes in money from tourism, and it does not get to the people. At the same time-tourism is one of the few things that brings the island money-so the central powers dont diversify into other sources of income. This keeps infrastructure piss poor-so no foriegn investors will invest.

Its a **** hole, and American liberals dont use their heads.
 
The United States doesn't exactly have the best human rights record for your information. Seems hypocritical to judge Cuba....

Ah the moral equivalence thing. Do you think the US and Cuba are the same? If you think they are not-why are you judging another nation?
 
The United States doesn't exactly have the best human rights record for your information. Seems hypocritical to judge Cuba....

Oh FFS...

And I thought we were having a reasonable debate here. The United States and it's citizens have been standing up for human rights all over the world for decades. Either in funding provided by the Government or private initiatives to raise money for those affected by human rights abuses.

Can you dig up some example of American "human rights abuses" ? Sure. Is it remotely relevant and timely ? No. Dig deep enough into any Country's history and you'll find example of human right abuses, from England's historic bent on world colonization to Germany's habit of starting world wars to Italy's dreaded Inquisitions.

Do you solely define a Country by it's historic lapses in judgment ? Only if you need to justify current Human right abuses apparently. Personally I think it's a bit dishonest to go digging for examples of our own lapses in judgement to justify the actions of exiting dictatorships.

Wow. I sincerely hope those in charge of our foreign policy processes aren't citing examples of US human rights abuses to justify any policy changes when it comes to Cuba. You would think not since it's utterly ridiculous and irrelevant, but then again, with the current administration nothings impossible.
 
Oh FFS...

And I thought we were having a reasonable debate here. The United States and it's citizens have been standing up for human rights all over the world for decades. Either in funding provided by the Government or private initiatives to raise money for those affected by human rights abuses.

Can you dig up some example of American "human rights abuses" ? Sure. Is it remotely relevant and timely ? No. Dig deep enough into any Country's history and you'll find example of human right abuses, from England's historic bent on world colonization to Germany's habit of starting world wars to Italy's dreaded Inquisitions.

Do you solely define a Country by it's historic lapses in judgment ? Only if you need to justify current Human right abuses apparently. Personally I think it's a bit dishonest to go digging for examples of our own lapses in judgement to justify the actions of exiting dictatorships.

Wow. I sincerely hope those in charge of our foreign policy processes aren't citing examples of US human rights abuses to justify any policy changes when it comes to Cuba. You would think not since it's utterly ridiculous and irrelevant, but then again, with the current administration nothings impossible.

Liberals cant make this distinction, its part of the psychopathy.

 
Oh FFS...

And I thought we were having a reasonable debate here. The United States and it's citizens have been standing up for human rights all over the world for decades. Either in funding provided by the Government or private initiatives to raise money for those affected by human rights abuses.

Can you dig up some example of American "human rights abuses" ? Sure. Is it remotely relevant and timely ? No. Dig deep enough into any Country's history and you'll find example of human right abuses, from England's historic bent on world colonization to Germany's habit of starting world wars to Italy's dreaded Inquisitions.

Do you solely define a Country by it's historic lapses in judgment ? Only if you need to justify current Human right abuses apparently. Personally I think it's a bit dishonest to go digging for examples of our own lapses in judgement to justify the actions of exiting dictatorships.

Wow. I sincerely hope those in charge of our foreign policy processes aren't citing examples of US human rights abuses to justify any policy changes when it comes to Cuba. You would think not since it's utterly ridiculous and irrelevant, but then again, with the current administration nothings impossible.

First of all I don't need to dig into history to find these human rights infractions. Check out our drone strikes across the middle east killing innocent civilians left and right. Look at the Federal government indefinitely detaining people that have never been convicted of a crime, look at the federal government spying on its own people, stopping and frisking whomever they feel without probably cause. Must I continue? These are all things we just accept now-a-days. Just because they are becoming a norm does not mean they are right. As to Cuba, I again point to nations across the globe that we turn a blind eye to. China, Myanmar, Equatorial Guinea, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Burma, Saudi Arabia, and Eritrea all have leaders that are known to oppress their people. Why fixate on Cuba? It seems childish to advocate an embargo on an oppressive and communist state when it is Cuba and is not essential to our own needs, but when the situation is the same in China, where we do need them economically, all of a sudden an embargo is not warranted. Stop picking and choosing and using the same old arguments to advocate an outdated relic of the Cold War.
 
Of course not, why judge the communist dictator? The get a pass from the left. You would do well to watch the speech I just posted.

I will reply the same way I replied to all the others, why fixate on Cuba when there are several other communist nations in the world that the US does not embargo, including China. It seems childish to pick and choose just when we need one for economic interests. AS for the human rights, there are almost a dozen (if not more) nations that have poor human rights records that we could care less about in terms of providing an embargo. Why the difference?
 
The president of the USA should never allow himself to
 
I will reply the same way I replied to all the others, why fixate on Cuba when there are several other communist nations in the world that the US does not embargo, including China. It seems childish to pick and choose just when we need one for economic interests. AS for the human rights, there are almost a dozen (if not more) nations that have poor human rights records that we could care less about in terms of providing an embargo. Why the difference?

Who is "fixated". Nothing has changed in policy for over 50 years. Cuba is still a commie ****hole.
 
Who is "fixated". Nothing has changed in policy for over 50 years. Cuba is still a commie ****hole.

China is too. Vietnam, Laos. how is it fair to embargo Cuba but not China.
 
And Noko. If Nam and Laos want to aim missles at us they can see what the consequences of that are.

Cuba has no missiles aimed at us anymore. There is no new indications of any hostilities aimed towards us. Your support for this embargo is based out of reflective reasoning.
 
First of all I don't need to dig into history to find these human rights infractions. Check out our drone strikes across the middle east killing innocent civilians left and right. Look at the Federal government indefinitely detaining people that have never been convicted of a crime, look at the federal government spying on its own people, stopping and frisking whomever they feel without probably cause. Must I continue? These are all things we just accept now-a-days. Just because they are becoming a norm does not mean they are right. As to Cuba, I again point to nations across the globe that we turn a blind eye to. China, Myanmar, Equatorial Guinea, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Burma, Saudi Arabia, and Eritrea all have leaders that are known to oppress their people. Why fixate on Cuba? It seems childish to advocate an embargo on an oppressive and communist state when it is Cuba and is not essential to our own needs, but when the situation is the same in China, where we do need them economically, all of a sudden an embargo is not warranted. Stop picking and choosing and using the same old arguments to advocate an outdated relic of the Cold War.

Drone strikes or the imprisonment of people who vowed to kill Americans based on a Religious ideology don't equate to 60 plus years of human rights abuses committed by a Communist dictator.

SURE, you can continue but I already know what your'e going to post and none of it remotely equates to what the people of Cuba have had to endure over the last 60 years.

For you to drag down the US to a reasonable point of equivalency would force you dig pretty deep into our Nations History and lets be honest, if you have to do that, you've pretty much lost the argument.

And it's a bit childish anyway right ? I get it if we WERE a Communist dictatorship that removed the basic liberties and rights you seemingly take for granted from every person who was unfortunate enough to be born in Cuba.

But we're not. And lifting the embargo still won't grant liberty to a people who's voiced or written dissent of their own Government could equate to a prison sentence or worse.

I tell you what, when Obama starts running down Conservatives and locking them up for their criticisms, then you may have a leg to stand on. To be fair he's already tried that to a degree with the whole IRS targeting of people who disagreed with him.

That's very "Castro-esque ".
 
Cuba has no missiles aimed at us anymore. There is no new indications of any hostilities aimed towards us. Your support for this embargo is based out of reflective reasoning.

You dont understand my argument-Actions have consequences and any nation that threatens the US will be hurting for generations. Deal with it.
 
You dont understand my argument-Actions have consequences and any nation that threatens the US will be hurting for generations. Deal with it.

When do you get over it in a lifetime?
 
You dont understand my argument-Actions have consequences and any nation that threatens the US will be hurting for generations. Deal with it.

those actions happened 50 years ago.
 
Iraq was a Communist Country 90 miles South South East from the Florida Keys ?

Seriously, apples and oranges dude and Iraq isn't ruled by a Dictator with two sadistic sons anymore and is a good example of a bi-partisan approach to address a issue that was being manipulated by the very dictator that we removed.

Arm Chair Quarter backing it for partisan reasons isn't really relevant to the dictatorship that its 90 miles away from the tip of Florida.

Well, Iraq is a little farther away, and Saddam had only one son. Other than that, the situation is fairly similar.
 
That's not infatuation

*THIS* is infatuation!
Obviously you don't have many friends from the Arab world. That is simply the culture there. Nobody is going to call you a fag if you hold hands with a guy.
 
Obviously you don't have many friends from the Arab world. That is simply the culture there. Nobody is going to call you a fag if you hold hands with a guy.

But if Obama shake hands, it's because he's infatuated with the man!!

It's almost as if you haven't read anything in this thread.
 
But if Obama shake hands, it's because he's infatuated with the man!!

It's almost as if you haven't read anything in this thread.
Obama subserviently bows to them. Big difference.
 
Back
Top Bottom