The US gov't hates Cuba, a Communist nation. The US currently has a more than 40yr old trade embargo against Cuba. The US gov't loves China, a Communist nation. No need to say, China's trade relationship with the US is muah, kiss kiss - a lovely affair.

The US believes that Cuba needs more democracy. But here's a recent example of how China's gov't works: China's government believes that it should regulate the information that its citizens can access on the internet. I wouldn't call this an American ideal.

Two reasons why the US loathes Cuba and has imposed a 40yr trade embargo is because they're communist and Fidel Castro is supposed to be a repressive dictator. China doesn't have the best record on human rights in the UN themselves (as I recall). China is also a communist nation.


So what reasons are there for the US to trade with China and have an embargo on Cuba? This doesn't make sense to me. What do you guys think?

So what reasons are there for the US to trade with China and have an embargo on Cuba? This doesn't make sense to me. What do you guys think?


Well the reason is that they have the ability to make crappy things that we want cheaply and the Cubans don't.

I agree that the policy isn't completely sensical. Some of that has to do with Cuban 'dissidents' here in the USA. But the Dems follow more or less the same policy regarding both countries.

We can afford to poop on Cuba. We can't afford to poop on China.

Im doing some reserch in the Cuba - US relations, The US has imposed embargos on Cuba for the last 47 yrs, but still the US trades with Cuba unofficaly, but still imposes the Helms-Burton Act, which allows U.S. citizens to sue foreign companies using property in Cuba confiscated from them after Fidel Castro seized power in 1959. The USA, marshal islands and Israel have voted against 173 nations in the UN to keep the embargos going, even though they have no purpose. They say that there voting to keep the embargos the push for a democracy wich obvously isnt working.

Hmmm. Shouldn't we be able to decide that we don't want to do business with the Cubans?

It is like since we do business with the Chinese then we HAVE to do business with the Cubans.

I mean we have FREE elections. The policies put in place are ratified by the people unlike in either China or Cuba.

I mean we have FREE elections. The policies put in place are ratified by the people unlike in either China or Cuba.
in theory...

No theory. I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

So what reasons are there for the US to trade with China and have an embargo on Cuba? This doesn't make sense to me. What do you guys think?

I think the embargo is just an example of our collective shame over allowing a communist country to exist 100 miles from our shores. You should also consider that the boomers in charge now were the same kids who remembered being scared shitless during the cuban missile crisis. You don't forget crap like that, and people do hold grudges.

No theory. I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

Doesnt require tin foil to prove that there were thousands of voting oddities in the last 2 election. Florida in 2000 is a perfect enough example. But if you want more, simply the hundreds of counties that had over votes specificaly for one candidate, or countys that have always voted one party, and had been polled to vote that way again, suddenly going heavily against the party that they favored up untill election day.

That and Diebold saying that Bush would win come hell or high water, and how unbelievably easy it would be to erase or give thousands of votes on there machines.

Sorry--Its all fact.

Former Ambassador Wayne Smith has said that US policy toward Cuba is "pathological." It's certainly self-defeating, and has only served to strengthen Castro politically.

BAKER: Why does the US continue to maintain a -- a Cold War foreign policy towards Cuba?

SMITH: It's difficult to say why the United States continues to maintain this policy. There really is no rational explanation for it, not even domestic politics. Some say that we simply need some little country against which we can lift high or continue to lift high the Cold War banners. I think there may be something to that. Another explanation is that it's simply very difficult for a great country to come to terms with a tiny little neighbor that still refuses to do its bidding.

BAKER: What -- What threat does Cuba pose the United States today?

SMITH: Cuba poses no threat whatsoever to the United States today. I think during the Cold War years we had to take the possibility of a military threat mounted from Cuba seriously. It happened in 1962 with the Soviet missiles in place there. And so long as we were in this adversarial relationship with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the fact that Cuba was its military ally was a matter of concern to us. But the Soviet Union has now collapsed. The Cold War is over. We are giving most favored nation treatment to China, lifted the embargo on Vietnam. We have a fulsome relationship with Russia. But we are tightening the embargo on Cuba.

http://www.cdi.org/ADM/1127/Smith.html

The pathology (as in other cases) can be traced to politics, specifically, pandering the the Cuban exile community in Miami, which mostly consists of gangsters, disgruntled fascists and idiots.

I agree with the premise of this thread though...we should NOT be doing business with China, it's the inherent greed of our political system that is allowing this to happen.
Oh, and just to throw this in...people who question what the US does are not necessarily "American hating leftists". You can never improve something if you don't question it. And if you think our country is already perfect your insane.

Anyone who doesn't wish the U.S. to do business with China should also support the significant downsizing of our government. Deficit spending on entitlements and pork is financed with bonds bought by the Chinese.

This charge of hypocrisy is hilarious.

Typically, opponents of US foreign policy share this hypocrisy, but only with the reverse preferences. They scold the United States for having diplomatic and trade relations with China for the reason it has human rights violations. But they then turn around and scold the United States for its embargo on Cuba as a needlessly vindictive policy.

Excuse me if I sound uninterested in "hypocrisy" charges.




*and, for the record, now that the Cold War is over, I'm not entirely against re-assessing our policy towards Cuba. Communist nations don't seem to fare too well when they thaw.

I agree that the policy isn't completely sensical. Some of that has to do with Cuban 'dissidents' here in the USA. But the Dems follow more or less the same policy regarding both countries.

Good point. Do you believe it's politics that trumping a lack of a consistent foreign policy? Do you believe that that's what should ulitmately determine US foreign policy?

We can afford to poop on Cuba. We can't afford to poop on China.

Good point.

Hmmm. Shouldn't we be able to decide that we don't want to do business with the Cubans?

Yes. Of course. But what are the reasons for not doing business freely with Cuba for 40 plus yrs.

It is like since we do business with the Chinese then we HAVE to do business with the Cubans.

Of course not. But what are the reasons for not doing business freely with Cuba for 40 plus yrs? And is the foreign policy the US has with Cuba consistent with how the US gov't conducts relations with other nations - particulary communist China.

I mean we have FREE elections. The policies put in place are ratified by the people unlike in either China or Cuba

Just because a majortiy of Congress or the president may support the embargo doesn't mean the majority of Americans do. I wonder what an American poll would reveal. I wonder if Americans can see the hypocrisy here. Then, I wonder if a majority of Americans would agree to maintain the embargo.

This charge of hypocrisy is hilarious.

Typically, opponents of US foreign policy share this hypocrisy, but only with the reverse preferences. They scold the United States for having diplomatic and trade relations with China for the reason it has human rights violations. But they then turn around and scold the United States for its embargo on Cuba as a needlessly vindictive policy.

Excuse me if I sound uninterested in "hypocrisy" charges.


*and, for the record, now that the Cold War is over, I'm not entirely against re-assessing our policy towards Cuba. Communist nations don't seem to fare too well when they thaw.

Hypocritical in the sense that the American gov't asserts that its high democratic standard disallows itself from conducting unrestricted trade with communist Cuba, but at the same time it affords itself the opportunity to conduct unrestricted trade with communist China.


Do you believe that it should be this way? If you were a Cuban do you think you would you view it as hypocritical? Or at least a lack of consistency?

Hypocritical in the sense that the American gov't asserts that its high democratic standard disallows itself from conducting unrestricted trade with communist Cuba, but at the same time it affords itself the opportunity to conduct unrestricted trade with communist China.

I don't necessarily believe that's the reasoning for why we have an embargo on Cuba. I think the fact it's led by a madman who demanded the United States be obliterated in a nuclear holocaust may have more to do with it. We can't say the same about China in that regard, which brings us to the reason why there are two different policies: they're not the same country. The quip that the right sees things black and white and that the left has a sense of nuance certainly has a glaring absence in this topic.


Do you believe that it should be this way? If you were a Cuban do you think you would you view it as hypocritical? Or at least a lack of consistency?

No, because I believe most of Cuba and the leadership of Cuba views us as an enemy and they would expect us to act this way. We are not enemies with China, we are friends. You would expect to act friendly towards allies and belligerent towards enemies, wouldn't you?

Good point. Do you believe it's politics that trumping a lack of a consistent foreign policy? Do you believe that that's what should ulitmately determine US foreign policy?


Of course domestic politics get played out on the national stage for good and ill. I don't think it DOES ultimately decide foriegn policy, so no.

Good point.



Yes. Of course. But what are the reasons for not doing business freely with Cuba for 40 plus yrs.


Well the same as they were originally. Fidel is a commie. We don't like commies. Fidel took US property without compensation. Fidel hasn't changed his ways so neither have we.

Of course not. But what are the reasons for not doing business freely with Cuba for 40 plus yrs? And is the foreign policy the US has with Cuba consistent with how the US gov't conducts relations with other nations - particulary communist China.

We don't have the same relationship with China that we do with Cuba. We don't have the same historic relationship either. Also Cuba is ninety miles off our coast and Fidel was very willing (suicidally willing) to nuke us.

Just because a majortiy of Congress or the president may support the embargo doesn't mean the majority of Americans do. I wonder what an American poll would reveal. I wonder if Americans can see the hypocrisy here. Then, I wonder if a majority of Americans would agree to maintain the embargo.


This whole last bit is quite condescending.

We have a poll. Most recently this past November. A couple of Dems won NJ and Va. Dems made a big deal out of it.

The American people have voted in

1960. Kennedy. 1964 LBJ. 1968&72 RMN. 1976 Jimmah. 1980&84 RWR

1988 GHWB. 1992&96 WJC. 2000&04 GWB.

12 Presidential elections. Numerous congressional elections.

THE POLL has been done.

the people have spoken

The pathology (as in other cases) can be traced to politics, specifically, pandering the the Cuban exile community in Miami, which mostly consists of gangsters, disgruntled fascists and idiots.

And terrorists.


http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2005/7/19/25839/6898

American foreign policy has been full of hypocrisy for over 200 years. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional.
Just look at the Native Americans.
Or the Spanish-American war.
Or the Sedition Act during World War I.
Or the way our country does business with some human rights violaters and not others.
There is consistency in our government, but you can't successfully argue that it's based on any well defined moral standards.

I think the fact it's led by a madman who demanded the United States be obliterated in a nuclear holocaust may have more to do with it. We can't say the same about China in that regard, which brings us to the reason why there are two different policies: they're not the same country. The quip that the right sees things black and white and that the left has a sense of nuance certainly has a glaring absence in this topic.
C'mon! It's about the economy! China is a huge potential market for us, cuba is far less so, plus the US ploicy is influenced by Floridas electoral votes .

No, because I believe most of Cuba and the leadership of Cuba views us as an enemy and they would expect us to act this way. We are not enemies with China, we are friends. You would expect to act friendly towards allies and belligerent towards enemies, wouldn't you?

We are quite content to do business with countries whose people hate us, but whose govt. plays footsy with us economically: Pakistan, Saudia Arabia, hell any ME country, while we turn our backs on Cuba, whose people, for the most part, are friendly with us, and whose govt. hates us! There was no economic boycott (merely limits on trade) against Russia (Kruschev: "we will bury you.")during the cold war, because they took everything they needed from satelite countries, and there was little, or no attempt to ban travel either. We use boycotts and travel bans for countries who are small enough.

Cuba plays a role in fomenting opposition to the WASP supremacy in Central and South America.Castro and Chavez are assuming a hostile posture against the US-I don't think it's in the character of our relationship that we'll be accepted as friends.
Our relationship with china is less personal and less threatening..

Cuba plays a role in fomenting opposition to the WASP supremacy in Central and South America.Castro and Chavez are assuming a hostile posture against the US

Are those countries assuming a hostile posture towards the US, or is it the other way around? It was the current Bush administration that tightened the embargo on Cuba. Chavez believes that the US gov't was involved in a coup against him.

I don't think it's in the character of our relationship that we'll be accepted as friends.

Please explain what you mean.

Our relationship with china is less personal and less threatening..

Cuba is 9o miles off the Florida coast. If they tried anything, they would be obliterated. You think they would provoke an attack from the US?

Are those countries assuming a hostile posture towards the US, or is it the other way around? It was the current Bush administration that tightened the embargo on Cuba. Chavez believes that the US gov't was involved in a coup against him.

Cuba's sorties in Central America antedate Bush-I'm more in sympathy with your positiion btw-I just wanted to bring in a point...

Please explain what you mean.

Americans in matters of diplomacy are seldom gentlemanly enough to concede anything unilaterally-they see this as a sign of weakness.
I see that attitude as a sign of boorishness and pomposity on the part of the Americans but that's neither here nor there...

Cuba is 9o miles off the Florida coast. If they tried anything, they would be obliterated. You think they would provoke an attack from the US?

They can fly below the "radar" so to speak-nothing overt enough to provoke but still cause trouble-but as I say this is only a rhetorical exercise for me-I'm only a layman but I could put together a better foreign policy than the Americans in my sleep..

C'mon! It's about the economy! China is a huge potential market for us, cuba is far less so, plus the US ploicy is influenced by Floridas electoral votes .

Sure. A government that benefits its citizens economically and politically is a good government and I think both of those reasons provide a moral imperative for why there are two seperate policies for two very different nations.


We are quite content to do business with countries whose people hate us, but whose govt. plays footsy with us economically: Pakistan, Saudia Arabia,


Pakistan is not led by a leader who voiced the desire to nuke us. Neither is Saudi Arabia. Neither of those countries are similar to Cuba.


while we turn our backs on Cuba, whose people, for the most part, are friendly with us

I don't know about that. It's pretty difficult to gauge public opinion in a nation that doesn't have freedom of speech. If anything, with a dictator who defines his life by his opposition to the United States projects a nation that is venomously anti-American.


There was no economic boycott (merely limits on trade) against Russia (Kruschev: "we will bury you.")during the cold war, because they took everything they needed from satelite countries, and there was little, or no attempt to ban travel either. We use boycotts and travel bans for countries who are small enough.

You mean the Soviet Union. But it is well known that Kruschev was a far more rational man than his public image would suggest, and a far more rational man than Castro. It was the Soviet Union that pulled back the reigns on possible nuclear war when Castro desired it.

The Soviet Union is not Cuba.

Hey, we had an embargo against South Africa--a ruthless bulwark against Communist expansion in that region. Why is that?

I know the foks up here in Canada would encourage the US to continue to maintain its stance of Non investment in Cuba. It allows them to and the Europeans to hold the best real estate and investment opportunities in that dollar hungry nation.

Just one question has anyone on this board been there? I have lots of friends who have and love it. they do not report a repressive dicatatorship at all. Just difficult economic conditions thanks to the US embargo.

The US gov't hates Cuba, a Communist nation. The US currently has a more than 40yr old trade embargo against Cuba. The US gov't loves China, a Communist nation. No need to say, China's trade relationship with the US is muah, kiss kiss - a lovely affair.


Cuba was a Soviet ally. China was a Soviet antagonist. Cuba is 80 miles off the coast of Florida. China is across the Pacific ocean. Cuba deals in seashells and prostitution. China has one of the largest economies in the world.

There are some more differences.

I don't quite understand. Are you saying we SHOULDN'T oppose a repressive dictator because we don't oppose ALL of them?

Or that we should also oppose the Chinese?

I don't quite understand. Are you saying we SHOULDN'T oppose a repressive dictator because we don't oppose ALL of them?

Or that we should also oppose the Chinese?

I'm merely pointing out the inconsistency in American foreign policy.

So what reasons are there for the US to trade with China and have an embargo on Cuba? This doesn't make sense to me. What do you guys think?

I think you need to study the issue some more. There's lots more it than they're all a bunch of commies.

I think you need to study the issue some more. There's lots more it than they're all a bunch of commies.

Already studied it.

I'm merely pointing out the inconsistency in American foreign policy.

I'm merely pointing out that China and Cuba are very different nations. There would be "inconsistency" if they were very similar. Are you arguing that the two nations are similiar?

I'm merely pointing out that China and Cuba are very different nations. There would be "inconsistency" if they were very similar. Are you arguing that the two nations are similiar?

Similarites? Please see post #1

Similarites? Please see post #1

What was Cuba's relationship with the Soviet Union during the Cold War? What was China's? Not similar.

What is the composition of China's government? What is the composition of Cuba's? Not similar.

Did China ever demand that the United States be vaporized in a nuclear winter? Did Cuba? Not similar.

And, again, the charge that there's some sort of "hypocrisy" between how we deal with two entirely different nations sort of suggests that we are treating one of these nations correctly, and one incorrectly. Yet, the critics of this "hypocrisy" have no problem in sharing the very hypocrisy themselves, only with the inverse demands....it's a shame that we are so friendly to such a human rights monster like China, but it's also a shame we don't want to have anything to do with Fidel Castro. Who really is the hypocrite here?

What was Cuba's relationship with the Soviet Union during the Cold War? What was China's? Not similar.

That was over 40 yrs ago. What are you trying to convey here?

What is the composition of China's government? What is the composition of Cuba's? Not similar.

They're both communist. You say they're composed differently. That being the case (and I'm taking your word), your willingness to point out dissimilarities in the structure of their governments doesn't invalidate the similarities that I pointed out in my initial post. Are you implying that my statements regarding the similarities of both nations are false?

Did China ever demand that the United States be vaporized in a nuclear winter? Did Cuba? Not similar.

um, ok.

And, again, the charge that there's some sort of "hypocrisy" between how we deal with two entirely different nations sort of suggests that we are treating one of these nations correctly, and one incorrectly. Yet, the critics of this "hypocrisy" have no problem in sharing the very hypocrisy themselves, only with the inverse demands....it's a shame that we are so friendly to such a human rights monster like China, but it's also a shame we don't want to have anything to do with Fidel Castro. Who really is the hypocrite here?

See post #14.

Furthermore, China isn't exactly a beacon of democracy according to America's standards. Hence, the reason for this thread.

That was over 40 yrs ago. What are you trying to convey here?


Well, as I said before, I don't oppose re-examining our relationship with Cuba because the Cold War is in the rear-view mirror, but the fact that Cuba was an anti-American, jingoistic ally of the Soviet Union off the tip of Florida and China was a distant antagonist of the USSR seems pretty relevent.

They're both communist. You say they're composed differently. That being the case (and I'm taking your word), your willingness to point out dissimilarities in the structure of their governments doesn't invalidate the similarities that I pointed out in my initial post. Are you implying that my statements regarding the similarities of both nations are false?


The similarities are relatively superficial. But, to restate my previous sentiment: if the United States is incorrect in its policy due to hypocrisy, then that suggests we are dealing with one of these nations more or less correctly and more or less incorrrectly with the other. Which nation are we dealing with correctly and which one are we not?

But, yes, the similarities are pretty superficial, and especially in light of the differences and circumstances of both nations.


See post #14.

Furthermore, China isn't exactly a beacon of democracy according to America's standards. Hence, the reason for this thread.

Perhaps the basis of American foreign policy isn't so simplistic. Perhaps the mindset of American foreign policy allows for it to see nuances, not black and white. China is not Cuba. Cuba is not China.