Is the USA uncivilised?

[Clinton Huxley]

Typical American economic warfare against a rival. Free trade my lordly rear. They're just scared that a relaxation of the embargo will result in an influx of cheap Cuban heels, destroying the American heel industry.

[Seabass]

(that should go without saying, but I expect a flood of US responses which will amount to nothing except criticisms of Cuba...)

Why would you expect that? Polls I've seen show that most Merkins would like to see the embargo end.

[JimC]

(that should go without saying, but I expect a flood of US responses which will amount to nothing except criticisms of Cuba...)

Why would you expect that? Polls I've seen show that most Merkins would like to see the embargo end.

OK, fair point.

Then, explain why your government is saying no?

[pErvinalia]

I'd also love to know why they keep saying no. I can't see what purpose the embargo serves.

[Seabass]

(that should go without saying, but I expect a flood of US responses which will amount to nothing except criticisms of Cuba...)

Why would you expect that? Polls I've seen show that most Merkins would like to see the embargo end.

OK, fair point.

Then, explain why your government is saying no?

Beats me. Alas, elected representatives don't always give the people what they want.

[FBM]

Typical American economic warfare against a rival. Free trade my lordly rear. They're just scared that a relaxation of the embargo will result in an influx of cheap Cuban heels, destroying the American heel industry.

As long as they keep making Republicans, we're covered in that department.

[colubridae]

Personally, I'm in favor of voluntary eugenics on the part of parents deciding not to have kids who will have major genetic diseases - for example by using preimplantation genetic diagnosis when doing in vitro fertilization - but that's irrespective of race. I don't think the fact that I approve of an acquaintance who used this technique to avoid having a child with cystic fibrosis makes me a racist.

What you have described is not eugenics. It's a sort of negative non-eugenics, if you like.

It isn't selecting the best.

It's de-selecting the 'damaged'.

“eugenics” is going to soon become a serious issue.
Selecting alleles (it’s confusing to use the word genes, since genes must be incorporated) for your offspring, which are not present in you and your partner’s genome is theoretically possible. Maybe some way off technically, but certainly feasible.

[Seth]

A piece of news just one day old. I could not resist this post. Please note, though. I am having a dig at the US administration. Not the American people.

The United Nations voted 188 to 2 to call for the end to the embargo against Cuba. Dissenting votes were the USA (surprise, surprise) and its sycophant, Israel. 98% of the world's nations want the embargo ended, and yet the US administration, in its arrogance, will not.

This embargo started in March 1958. That is, it has been going 55 years. It has achieved absolutely nothing except harm to the poor people of Cuba. It has kept their economic growth low and kept millions in poverty, totally unnecessarily. It has not changed a thing politically.

Surely, if America opposes communism, it should be to help people. Yet all they are doing is causing terrible harm, for exactly no practical reason. Is this civilised?

If the poor people of Cuba want our help all they have to do is overthrow the Castro regime and eschew Marxism. Oh, wait, they can't because Castro took away all their guns and "disappears" anyone who dares to criticize his regime. Haven't you ever wondered why people in Cuba are willing to board rafts made from innertubes, plywood and rope and paddle out into the shark-infested waters in a desperate and frequently fatal attempt to set foot on American shores?

FFS, the only thing that keeps Cuba from becoming a Chinese staging area (rather than a Russian one...or maybe both) is the US embargo. If the Castro regime gave a flying fuck about it's people it would have changed it's Marxist tune and tried to become a friend of America rather than an implacable enemy.

We tried to help the people of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs, which was an unmitigated disaster because as usual the pussies in the White House decided to use half-measures. We should have gone all Grenada on their sorry asses a long, long time ago.

[Blind groper]

As Jim said, predictable response from Seth.

My complements to Seabass, though, who posted some sound common sense.

To Seth
As is seen in Syria, overturning a government is not as easy as you make it out to be. Civilian deaths in Syria now exceed 120,000. A very heavy price to pay. Overcoming Castro in Cuba would cost at least that much, or more.

Not only that, but I suspect that the average Cuban does not see Castro as the enemy. The USA fills that role.

[Warren Dew]

I'd also love to know why they keep saying no. I can't see what purpose the embargo serves.

The U.S. has a substantial population of Cuba expatriates whose property the Castro regime expropriated or nationalized. These expatriates exert strong political pressure to keep the embargo in force until the Castro regime ends or liberalizes.

[JimC]

I'd also love to know why they keep saying no. I can't see what purpose the embargo serves.

The U.S. has a substantial population of Cuba expatriates whose property the Castro regime expropriated or nationalized. These expatriates exert strong political pressure to keep the embargo in force until the Castro regime ends or liberalizes.

Many of the expatriates are the descendants of corrupt robber baron capitalists and Batista era oligarchs who would have kept Cuban working people in utter poverty unless a revolution happened. Whatever the excesses of the revolution (and there were many, no doubt), I won't shed a tear for the descendants of a wealthy clique of exploitative land owners.

[Warren Dew]

Personally, I'm in favor of voluntary eugenics on the part of parents deciding not to have kids who will have major genetic diseases - for example by using preimplantation genetic diagnosis when doing in vitro fertilization - but that's irrespective of race. I don't think the fact that I approve of an acquaintance who used this technique to avoid having a child with cystic fibrosis makes me a racist.

What you have described is not eugenics. It's a sort of negative non-eugenics, if you like.

It isn't selecting the best.

It's de-selecting the 'damaged'.

“eugenics” is going to soon become a serious issue.
Selecting alleles (it’s confusing to use the word genes, since genes must be incorporated) for your offspring, which are not present in you and your partner’s genome is theoretically possible. Maybe some way off technically, but certainly feasible.

What do you see as the difference between "selecting the best" and "de-selecting the 'damaged'"? And how is sterilizing the 'mentally defective', the classical example of eugenics, not "de-selecting the 'damaged'"?

[Warren Dew]

I'd also love to know why they keep saying no. I can't see what purpose the embargo serves.

The U.S. has a substantial population of Cuba expatriates whose property the Castro regime expropriated or nationalized. These expatriates exert strong political pressure to keep the embargo in force until the Castro regime ends or liberalizes.

Many of the expatriates are the descendants of corrupt robber baron capitalists and Batista era oligarchs who would have kept Cuban working people in utter poverty unless a revolution happened. Whatever the excesses of the revolution (and there were many, no doubt), I won't shed a tear for the descendants of a wealthy clique of exploitative land owners.

Then why shed a tear for sanctions on a government at least equally exploitative?

[JimC]

I'd also love to know why they keep saying no. I can't see what purpose the embargo serves.

The U.S. has a substantial population of Cuba expatriates whose property the Castro regime expropriated or nationalized. These expatriates exert strong political pressure to keep the embargo in force until the Castro regime ends or liberalizes.

Many of the expatriates are the descendants of corrupt robber baron capitalists and Batista era oligarchs who would have kept Cuban working people in utter poverty unless a revolution happened. Whatever the excesses of the revolution (and there were many, no doubt), I won't shed a tear for the descendants of a wealthy clique of exploitative land owners.

Then why shed a tear for sanctions on a government at least equally exploitative?

Not shedding a tear, just wondering why the US can't let go of vindictive emotions, and move on...

[Seth]

As Jim said, predictable response from Seth.

My complements to Seabass, though, who posted some sound common sense.

To Seth
As is seen in Syria, overturning a government is not as easy as you make it out to be. Civilian deaths in Syria now exceed 120,000. A very heavy price to pay. Overcoming Castro in Cuba would cost at least that much, or more.

Not only that, but I suspect that the average Cuban does not see Castro as the enemy. The USA fills that role.

Nobody said freedom is free, or easy to achieve or maintain. It isn't. But if it's not bought with the blood of those who yearn to be free, it's not likely to be valued by anyone.

As for Cuba, once again, why does Cuba patrol its seas in order to drive people trying to leave Cuba back to Cuba and prevent them from escaping to the United States? Doesn't look like everybody agrees that Marxism or Castro are the way to go.

We have to build fences to keep people out. Marxists have to build fences to keep people in. Rather important, that.