A new era begins for Cuba

[DaveC]

Castro resigns as president, state-run paper reports

(CNN) -- Fidel Castro announced his resignation as president of Cuba and commander-in-chief of Cuba's military on Tuesday, according to a letter published in the state-run newspaper, Granma.

Castro, 81, temporarily handed power to his younger brother Raul Castro in July 2006 after undergoing intestinal surgery. He hasn't been seen in public since his surgery, but he has appeared in numerous videos and photos in state media.

In December 2007, a Cuban television news anchor read a letter reportedly written by Fidel Castro promising he would not "cling to office" or be an impediment to rising young leaders. Castro rose to power in 1959.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/02/19/castro/index.html

Not sure how I feel about this. While he is (was) a dictator in almost every sense of the word, Castro's done some truly great things for Cuba.

 

[Varitek]

WOAH

I can't wait to see what the US does re: sanctions. Which should have been dropped years ago anyway.

 

[Tiger Edge]

Nothing will change....yet anyway. Still, We take what we can get at this point.
I'm sure my family in Cuba is privately celebrating...in their heads, of course, to avoid detection and arrest.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Raúl will continue as if nothing has changed. He's practically been running Cuba since 2006 anyway.

 

[U2democrat]

Who would be in line after Raul?

 

[Tiger Edge]

One of his minions? There's no chance of a real election anyway, so the power will just be handed to someone else.

So much for a "Presidency"

 

[diamond]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7CFoJuRcjHU&feature=related

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

WOAH

I can't wait to see what the US does re: sanctions. Which should have been dropped years ago anyway.

I think a lot of bad things have been blamed on Fidel and no one has really stopped to think about this terrible and cruel embargo placed upon Cuba by the US. Shame on the US for trying to control the world.

 

[Tiger Edge]

It's a two way street.
U.S. money has been outlawed in Cuba.

And somewhat in the same vein:

On Wikipedia, WITH sources
Although Cuba initially declined to engage in such trade having even refused US food aid in the past,[8] seeing it as a half-measure serving U.S. interests, Castro began to allow the purchase of food from the U.S. as a result of Hurricane Michelle in November 2001. These purchases have continued and grown since then. By now (2007) The US is the largest food supplier of Cuba[9]and it's 6th trading partner.

 

[anitram]

The US embargo on Cuba is really one of the most hypocritical, nonsensical foreign policy issues the country has. And given the current state of US foreign policy, that's really saying something.

 

[verte76]

I agree.

 

[the iron horse]

I hope the U.S. will lift the embargo.

It would be nice to purchase a Cuban cigar legally.


Wishing Cuba liberty and free elections

 

[Infinity]

WOAH

I can't wait to see what the US does re: sanctions. Which should have been dropped years ago anyway.

Nonsense. The U.S. is doing what is best for the people of Cuba, just like it is doing for the people of Iraq. This is the reason why we are the most respected and loved country in the world, becasue we reach out to help others.

 

[INDY500]

Not sure how I feel about this. While he is (was) a dictator in almost every sense of the word, Castro's done some truly great things for Cuba.

Apparently not enough to convince the 2 million Cuban exiles and political refugees now living in the United States to return home or to stop the thousands of "balseros" (rafters) that continue to risk their lives every year to join them.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Re: Re: A new era begins for Cuba

Apparently not enough to convince the 2 million Cuban exiles and political refugees now living in the United States to return home or to stop the thousands of "balseros" (rafters) that continue to risk their lives every year to join them.

Which is kind of ironic considering that the US should be blame for a part of what is putting the country in misery.

I visited Cuba last year and it´s a whole different ideology there.

While there are some good aspects about their communism (ie: hardly any theft, security for everyone, etc.) something happened to me over there that just left me with a sour taste of the whole thing.

Long story short, we were given a bottle of rum at some show we attended. None of us wanted to drink rum so we bought beers and I was carrying the bottle of rum in the back pocket of my jeans. We went to this public carnival and I decided it would be fun to take out the bottle and do some straight-out-of-the-bottle shots. One of the cubans who were there asked me if he could have a drink so I was like "Go for it". As soon as he grabbed the bottle lots of other cubans just swarmed him begging for a drink and trying to have as much as they could. It felt like when you throw a piece of bread at a pond with sardines.

I have lots of mixed feelings towars Cuba´s situation. I think that Fidel has a good natured idea to stand up to the "Empire" but the price his people pay is too high to expect anyone to pay. It´s too much of a sacrifice over an ideology.

I may be wrong, though, and I am definitely willing to learn more about different points of views regarding Cuba.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

I was actually in Cuba when Castro resigned
(For selfish reasons, I was hoping for a popular revolt, a lockdown in the country and being forced to stay indefinitely)

Apparently Raoul is much more receptive to opening up the economy.
Perhaps the way forward is something similar to China - liberalize the economy but the political apparatus remains 'socialist'...

 

[Abomb-baby]

Re: Re: Re: A new era begins for Cuba

I have lots of mixed feelings towards Cuba´s situation. I think that Fidel has a good natured idea to stand up to the "Empire" but the price his people pay is too high to expect anyone to pay. It´s too much of a sacrifice over an ideology.

Stand up to what empire? The democratic Empire of the United States? Have you ever talked to a cuban who is now living in the U.S.? They despise the man. He is a dictator who is solely responsible for any demise his country has endured. Our sanctions and embargoes are our way of saying we don't agree with what your doing, Mr. Castro. Maybe if it was that important to him, he would have opened up free and democratic elections sometime within the last 50 years. I will celebrate the day that the people of Cuba have a democratic government elected by the people. I would also support some sort of easing of sanctions if Cuba was to show some desire to move in that direction.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

If you aks the native cubans they would tell you that those that left the country have a different way of thinking and that is why they left.

Please don´t use that pissed-off argumentative tone with me because I am not arguing with you at all. I´m just saying what I saw and learned.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

If you aks the native cubans they would tell you that those that left the country have a different way of thinking and that is why they left.

True. And they left (usually) because they were personally affected by La Revolucion.

It's really difficult to ascertain what the common view is with regards to Fidel, people are too afraid to speak up.
*I* think they resent him for not having much freedom, money, food, etc but enjoy the free housing, education and health care.

 

[INDY500]

I hope there is a question about this issue during the debate.

Does Senator Clinton stand by the embargo, the Cuban Democracy Act, and the Helms-Burton Act? (signed into law by her husband)
What is Senator Obama's position other than to open "dialog"?

 

[BVS]

What is Senator Obama's position other than to open "dialog"?

Because we all know conservatives hate dialog. Push them out or attack them before asking questions.

 

[Abomb-baby]

Because we all know conservatives hate dialog. Push them out or attack them before asking questions.

How are these statements helpful to civil debate? Yeah I remember a certain conservative president who went to great lengths to have dialog with certain communist leader. I think some positive things came from those meetings, mainly the end of communism in the USSR and the cold war.

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

I hope there is a question about this issue during the debate.

Does Senator Clinton stand by the embargo, the Cuban Democracy Act, and the Helms-Burton Act? (signed into law by her husband)
What is Senator Obama's position other than to open "dialog"?

Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, in a crucial debate, differed on Thursday on how quickly to hold talks with Cuba now that Fidel Castro has resigned.
Cuba was an early topic at a very civilized CNN/Univision debate at the University of Texas, in a state where the Hispanic vote could be influential when Texas and Ohio vote on March 4.
The Democratic front-runner, Illinois Sen. Obama, expressed a willingness to move quickly toward a meeting with Castro's replacement, in line with his previous commitment to hold direct talks with leaders of hostile nations if he is elected president in November.
New York Sen. Clinton, seeking to slow Obama's momentum toward the Democratic presidential nomination, was more cautious, saying Cuba should first make progress on long-standing U.S. complaints such as improving human rights and releasing political prisoners.
Castro is being replaced by his brother, Raul Castro, 76.
"If we think that meeting with the president is a privilege that has to be earned, I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world," Obama said.
"I would meet without preconditions, although Senator Clinton is right, there has to be preparation," he added.
Clinton said she would be ready to meet with the new Cuban government "once it demonstrated that it truly was ready to change" direction.
"I would not meet with him until there was evidence" that changes were taking place, she said.
The policy difference was one of few surfacing during the Thursday night showdown in Austin, Texas, which gave Clinton a chance to turn around a Democratic presidential fight that has shifted decisively in the Illinois senator's favor after his streak of 10 straight victories.
Clinton sought to distinguish herself from Obama, needing to win upcoming contests in Ohio and Texas if she hopes to block Obama's march to the Democratic nomination for November's election.
Obama has a growing lead in pledged convention delegates who will choose the Democratic candidate at the August convention. The latest count by MSNBC gives Obama 1,168 to Clinton's 1,018.
Obama has managed to gain an increasing share of Clinton's core voting blocs of low-income workers while cutting into her margins with Hispanics.
The two big states of Ohio and Texas, with a combined total of 334 delegates at stake on March 4, have plenty of both.

________________

I particularly liked this:

"If we think that meeting with the president is a privilege that has to be earned, I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world," Obama said.

 

[BVS]

How are these statements helpful to civil debate? Yeah I remember a certain conservative president who went to great lengths to have dialog with certain communist leader. I think some positive things came from those meetings, mainly the end of communism in the USSR and the cold war.

I was just making fun of the pre-emptive twisting of words that you and INDY are so fond of...

You're both so indocrtrinated into thinking this will be the reaction that you post it as fact and it makes for oh so civil debate...

Yes, conservatives of old would entertain dialog in the past, but only while raising their fist behind their head higher and higher, but the cons of today have thrown dialog to the wind.

 

[Abomb-baby]

I was just making fun of the pre-emptive twisting of words that you and INDY are so fond of...

You're both so indocrtrinated into thinking this will be the reaction that you post it as fact and it makes for oh so civil debate...

Yes, conservatives of old would entertain dialog in the past, but only while raising their fist behind their head higher and higher, but the cons of today have thrown dialog to the wind.

You're so witty BonoVox..... Please don't paint me in the box you seem so quick to want to. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I'm wrong. I'm not anymore indoctrinated than you are. I may be a minority in my thinking, but I can live with that. Or is this forum for like minded thinkers only so you can pat one another on the back?

 

[BVS]

You're so witty BonoVox..... Please don't paint me in the box you seem so quick to want to. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I'm wrong. I'm not anymore indoctrinated than you are. I may be a minority in my thinking, but I can live with that. Or is this forum for like minded thinkers only so you can pat one another on the back?

I don't care that you disagree with me. In fact I welcome it. I have no reason to enter a discussion forum just to talk to people who think the way I do... But I don't appreciate the attack mode that you and others come in with, and believe me I've seen enough of your posts to know you come in here with fists up.

 

[Abomb-baby]

I don't care that you disagree with me. In fact I welcome it. I have no reason to enter a discussion forum just to talk to people who think the way I do... But I don't appreciate the attack mode that you and others come in with, and believe me I've seen enough of your posts to know you come in here with fists up.

Please give me an example of where I have attacked someone? I believe you calling me indoctrinated was a form of an attack. I think you confuse PASSION with an attack. I'm very passionate about my opinions but I don't believe I have ATTACKED anyone. I probably would have been banned from here a long time ago if that was the case.

 

[BVS]

Please give me an example of where I have attacked someone? I believe you calling me indoctrinated was a form of an attack. I think you confuse PASSION with an attack. I'm very passionate about my opinions but I don't believe I have ATTACKED anyone. I probably would have been banned from here a long time ago if that was the case.

Never said you attacked anyone, but you come in with an attack mode your fist are already up. I mean just look at the way you framed the hate crime thread. One of your very first post you made in FYM made a mod come in here and ask you to watch what you say. I'll back off if you back off. No more 'indoctrinated' stuff from me if you lay off the 4th reich crap...

 

[Abomb-baby]

How did I frame the hate crime thread? I posted a story and asked a question, nothing more and nothing less. Its seems to have gotten some feathers ruffled for some reason, however.

 

[Irvine511]

How did I frame the hate crime thread? I posted a story and asked a question, nothing more and nothing less. Its seems to have gotten some feathers ruffled for some reason, however.

well, you've edited your post ... but i was going to respond with this, re: hate crimes ...

How did I frame the hate crime thread? I posted a story and asked a question, nothing more and nothing less. Its seems to have gotten some feathers ruffled for some reason, however. I still haven't been able to get anyone besides myself to answer if the cops have gone to far and if we are going to protect a specific group of people does it mean that all groups are protected as well? I'm hoping someone answers the question, though. Under the hate speech laws of the UK, are all classes and groups protected, or does it spell out which one are?

this gets at the issue of hate crimes and why i have an ideological problem with them, even though i understand why they exist.

the reason why hate crimes are termed as such, and why they are in theory punished more severely is because when a person is singled out for a crime on the basis of a specific, known, quantifiable characteristic -- race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity -- then that crime is not only against that individual person, but against all those who share the same characteristic.

take a cross on a lawn. or the burning of a black church. are these actions done to bother that particular household, or that particular church, or is it done to intimidate *all* black people or all black churchgoers in a specific area?

likewise, if in my neighborhood, someone vandalizes a car and spraypaints "AIDS KILLS FAGGOTS DEAD" on it, how am i, obviously not the owner of the car, going to *not* be affected by that? the message was intended for me as well, in a way that it would not be for you.

this is the logic behind hate crimes.

now, the issue i have with hate crimes comes in determining which groups are worth of what must be termed a special group. you'll see federal hate crimes laws in place for blacks, women, jews ... but not for gays.

and that, to me, is just as discriminatory.