Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 19 Dec 2014, 1:50 pm

Fate
it seems to me that our BEST opportunity to secure some kind of liberalization in Cuba would be before we normalize relations with them.


Since 2010 430,000 Cubans have licensed private enterprises. In 2011 Cubans earned the right to private property. In 2013 most Cubans were free to travel abroad.

The reason? The realization that the Communism of Fidel wasn't working.
Due to American embargo? since the American embargo was unsupported by other nations...probably not.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 19 Dec 2014, 2:04 pm

rickyp wrote:Fate
it seems to me that our BEST opportunity to secure some kind of liberalization in Cuba would be before we normalize relations with them.


Since 2010 430,000 Cubans have licensed private enterprises. In 2011 Cubans earned the right to private property. In 2013 most Cubans were free to travel abroad.

The reason? The realization that the Communism of Fidel wasn't working.
Due to American embargo? since the American embargo was unsupported by other nations...probably not.


To be clear, you are saying liberalization is occurring in Cuba?

You believe freedom is on the rise in Cuba?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 Dec 2014, 2:16 pm

Doctor Fate wrote:
Reforms first, normalization second.


Except that there have been reforms in Cuba in the last few years.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... n/7083343/

And that doesn't explain why the USA has an embassy in Sudan. What have they reformed lately?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 Dec 2014, 2:19 pm

Doctor Fate wrote:To be clear, you are saying liberalization is occurring in Cuba?

You believe freedom is on the rise in Cuba?
It is. Slowly, but it is. There are more private businesses than before. Homosexuality is no longer repressed as it was. Even ten years ago when I was out there it was possible to discuss things with people and hear dissent without them fearing they'd be clapped in irons.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 3:00 am

Doctor Fate wrote:I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that the President wants to use this to negotiate away Guantanamo and thus force Congress to shut the camp there.
Gosh, do you think the President wants to shut the internment camps at Guantanamo?

You'd think if that was the case he'd have mentioned it by now.

But I doubt very much that the intention is to suddenly close the Naval base.

He's doing everything he can to release terrorists, so this doesn't seem unlikely.
Grow up.

Do we trade with unsavory regimes? Yes.
And you have embassies with them, and international agreements, too.

Are there any regimes with whom we deal who are more relentlessly anti-American? Not likely.
Most of Cuba's anti-American stance is based on the rebuffs that they got in the period immediately after the Revolution, followed by the sanctions, support for the counter-revolutionaries such as the Bay of Pigs, and relentless anti-Cubanism. And most of it is really rhetorical nowadays.

Are there any regimes with whom we deal who have helped in more attacks against the US and its interests? Probably not that we can document.
Which attacks on the US in the last 10-15 years have been assisted by Cuba, and which by other countries?

And which attacks on "US interests"?

It would be good to know, because I'm not aware of many, but it seems that the recent threats and cyberattacks on Sony came from North Korea via China.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 7:36 am

danivon wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:He's doing everything he can to release terrorists, so this doesn't seem unlikely.
Grow up.


Maybe you should educate yourself. I believe these were some of the latest to be released. The President is willing to do anything to close Gitmo, including lying, sending them to countries who will release them and accuse the US of kidnapping them . . . whatever it takes.

The United States guaranteed that six former Guantanamo Bay prisoners had not been involved in terrorism before they arrived to Uruguay as refugees, President Jose Mujica said on Tuesday.

The four Syrians, one Palestinian and a Tunisian arrived in Uruguay on Dec. 8 as refugees, the first prisoners from the U.S. base in Cuba to be sent to South America. Mujica agreed to accept the men as a humanitarian gesture and has said they would be given help getting established in a country of 3.3 million people that has a Muslim population of about 300.

During a Tuesday press conference, Mujica showed a document from the U.S. State Department dated Dec. 2 saying there's no information that "the men were involved in conducting or facilitating terrorist activities against the United States or its partners or its allies." Members of Uruguay's opposition had requested the release of the documents as proof that the men are not dangerous.

"I never doubted, just by using my common sense, that they were paying for something they never did," Mujica said. "We considered this to be a just cause and we had to help them."


So, who are these fine men, these victims of America?

Mujica made public a document that he said was authored by the State Department. Dated December 2, it is signed by Clifford M. Sloan, President Obama’s special envoy for closing Guantánamo. After listing the six detainees who would be transferred to Uruguay, the document reads: “There is no information that the above mentioned individuals were involved in conducting or facilitating terrorist activities against the United States or its partners or allies.”

Mujica portrayed the document as vindication for his “blame America” rhetoric in taking in the six men. But the document published online (just one page from a longer file) is carefully worded. It is also misleading.

If by “terrorist activities” the State Department means spectacular attacks like those that occurred on September 11, 2001, it is technically correct. But there are plenty of worrisome “terrorist activities” that fall short of that standard. The State Department document doesn’t exonerate the six detainees or portray them as innocents who were wrongly detained, as Mujica did. It does not say the men were unconnected to al Qaeda at the time of their capture. That’s because the State Department cannot honestly make such representations.

Publicly available documents, including secret Joint Task Force-Guantánamo (JTF-GTMO) threat assessments that were leaked online, paint Uruguay’s newest residents in a far more troubling light. JTF-GTMO, which oversees the detention facility, deemed five of the six to be “high” risks, who are “likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies.” It recommended that all five high- risk detainees remain in the Defense Department’s custody. Only one man was determined to be a “medium” risk, who “may pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies,” and JTF-GTMO recommended that he be transferred out of DOD custody.

The intelligence in JTF-GTMO’s files connects all six to senior al Qaeda operatives, including Abu Zubaydah, who remains in custody at Guantánamo. A common myth holds that Abu Zubaydah was not really a full-blown al Qaeda member at the time of his capture in late March 2002. But there is abundant evidence, including in the leaked JTF-GTMO files, that this is an absurd reading of history. Numerous reports situate Zubaydah at the epicenter of al Qaeda’s operations when he was finally tracked down in Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Four of the six men—Ahmed Adnan Ahjam, Ali Husein Shaaban, Abd al Hadi Omar Mahmoud Faraj, and Jihad Ahmed Mujstafa Diyab—were members of what JTF-GTMO dubbed the “Syrian Group.” They allegedly belonged to a terrorist cell run by Abu Musab al Suri, a senior al Qaeda ideologue who is thought to be in the custody of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. They fled Syria for Afghanistan, where they were enrolled in various terrorist training camps affiliated with, or run by, al Qaeda.

According to the JTF-GTMO files, at least three of the four—Ahjam, Shaaban, and Faraj—stayed in a guesthouse that Zubaydah funded. There, JTF-GTMO’s military intelligence analysts assessed, they received “suicide operations training provided by” an al Qaeda leader known as Sheikh Issa al Masri. Sheikh Issa was responsible for indoctrinating numerous jihadists prior to and after 9/11. Issa’s specialty was convincing young men that suicide attacks are divinely mandated.

After the U.S.-led bombing campaign began in late 2001, the three Syrians retreated to Tora Bora, where, JTF-GTMO concluded, they “participated in hostilities against US and Coalition forces” in Osama bin Laden’s mountain complex under the command of a top al Qaeda leader. The Battle of Tora Bora was a seminal event in al Qaeda’s history, as much of the group’s top leadership slipped away. The jihadists who fought there did so to defend bin Laden in what was believed, at the time, to be al Qaeda’s last stand.

The three Syrians—Ahjam, Shaaban, and Faraj—were subsequently captured after they fled Tora Bora for Pakistan. They were not “kidnapped,” as President Mujica claimed. They were detained as enemy combatants in al Qaeda’s war against the United States. And while the State Department may claim that they did not participate in “terrorist activities,” the JTF-GTMO assessments conclude they fought on behalf of senior al Qaeda figures who did.

The fourth member of the Syrian group transferred to Uruguay, Jihad Ahmed Mujstafa Diyab, is described in the JTF-GTMO files as a “document forger who provided services to the network operated by” Zubaydah, “supporting European, North African, and Levant extremists” by “facilitating their international travels.” Diyab is an “associate of several other significant al Qaeda members,” including Mohammed Zammar, the al Qaeda recruiter responsible for wooing the men who would become kamikaze pilots on 9/11. Diyab is also affiliated with “other facilitators and identified document forgers,” which may come in handy if he wants to travel the world once again.

Abdul Bin Mohammed Bin Abess Ourgy, a Tunisian, is the fifth of the high-risk detainees transferred to Uruguay. JTF-GTMO concluded that Ourgy was both a “member of al Qaeda and a finance operative for the Tunisian Combatant Group (TCG),” which acted as an arm of al Qaeda in Europe prior to 9/11. The TCG was connected to multiple thwarted plots, including a planned attack on the U.S. embassy in Rome in early 2001. JTF-GTMO concluded that Ourgy attended the meeting at which the TCG was established and that he worked for a jihadist known as Abu Iyad al Tunisi, who led the TCG. After he was freed from a prison in Tunisia in 2011, Tunisi founded Ansar al Sharia Tunisia, which was responsible for assaulting the U.S. embassy in Tunis on September 14, 2012.

JTF-GTMO found that Ourgy may have had foreknowledge of the September 9, 2001, assassination of Ahmad Shah Massoud, the Northern Alliance leader. Massoud’s assassination was a key part of al Qaeda’s 9/11 plot, as it removed one of the Taliban’s most effective opponents from the battlefield in anticipation of America’s expected retaliation. Abu Zubaydah identified Ourgy as a trainee at his terrorist camp. And a document found on 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s hard drive identified Ourgy, using his alias, as a “captured al Qaeda member-fighter.”

The sixth and final ex-detainee is Mohammed Abdullah Tahamuttan, who is originally from the West Bank. Tahamuttan was deemed a “medium” risk by JTF-GTMO. He was captured during the same raids that netted Abu Zubaydah in late March 2002. The safe houses where Tahamuttan, Zubaydah, and others were captured were operated by Lashkar-e-Taiba, an al Qaeda-linked jihadist group in Pakistan. JTF-GTMO concluded that Tahamuttan was a member of Zubaydah’s Martyrs Brigade, which was created for the “purpose of returning to Afghanistan to conduct improvised explosive devices (IED) attacks against US and Coalition forces.”

It is often reported in the press that Guantánamo detainees, such as the six transferred to Uruguay, have been “cleared for release.” The implication is that the detainees have been “cleared” of wrongdoing and can be “released” without any reason for concern. In reality, neither the six detainees transferred to Uruguay nor any other remaining Guantánamo detainees have been “cleared for release.”


If ignorance is bliss, you must be the happiest man in the UK! When I say he's doing everything he can to release terrorists from Guantanamo, I mean it. I don't need to "grow up," you do. You lied. You have not apologized.

You intentionally mischaracterized what I said. When I used the word "née" to parenthetically correct a former representation you made, you lied about what I meant. See definition #2.

Maybe lying is acceptable where you're from. I'm not sure. I consider it unworthy of respect.

Are there any regimes with whom we deal who are more relentlessly anti-American? Not likely.
Most of Cuba's anti-American stance is based on the rebuffs that they got in the period immediately after the Revolution, followed by the sanctions, support for the counter-revolutionaries such as the Bay of Pigs, and relentless anti-Cubanism. And most of it is really rhetorical nowadays.


Cuban missile crisis. Cold War. Nearly ended the world. That kind of thing hurts feelings.

Are there any regimes with whom we deal who have helped in more attacks against the US and its interests? Probably not that we can document.
Which attacks on the US in the last 10-15 years have been assisted by Cuba, and which by other countries?


Which attacks has Cuba ever apologized and made reparations for?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 9:27 am

what attacks or acts of terrorism against Cuba has the US ever apologized for or paid reparations for?

The Bay of Pigs Invasion, known in Latin America as Invasión de Bahía de Cochinos (or Invasión de Playa Girón or Batalla de Girón), was a failed military invasion of Cuba undertaken by the CIA-sponsored paramilitary group Brigade 2506 on 17 April 1961. A counter-revolutionary military, trained and funded by the United States government's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Brigade 2506 fronted the armed wing of the Democratic Revolutionary Front (DRF) and intended to overthrow the revolutionary left-wing government of Fidel Castro. Launched from Guatemala, the invading force was defeated within three days by the Cuban armed forces, under the direct command of Prime Minister Fidel Castro.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles

If requires some kind of apology or reparations for past crimes, normalization of affairs between sovereign nations many nations would not have relations with the US. Mostly because the US has never really admitted some of these crimes...
Of course there are two viewpoints. Where the Vietnamese government sees its long war against the US as a war of national Liberation... and the US invovlement as criminal ...the Us has another view.
You might read the history of Nicaragua and wonder why they have normal affairs with the US considering how badly they have been wronged...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... _Nicaragua

1894: Month-long occupation of Bluefields
1896: Marines land in port of Corinto
1898: Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur
1899: Marines land at port of Bluefields
1907: "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up
1910: Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto
1912-33: Bombing, 20-year occupation, fought guerrillas
1981-90: CIA directs exile (Contra) revolution, plants harbor mines against government

really Fate, are you completely incapable of understanding that the other side might have some valid complaints too?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 9:40 am

How much "whataboutery" can go into one post?

rickyp wrote:what attacks or acts of terrorism against Cuba has the US ever apologized for or paid reparations for?

The Bay of Pigs Invasion, known in Latin America as Invasión de Bahía de Cochinos (or Invasión de Playa Girón or Batalla de Girón), was a failed military invasion of Cuba undertaken by the CIA-sponsored paramilitary group Brigade 2506 on 17 April 1961. A counter-revolutionary military, trained and funded by the United States government's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Brigade 2506 fronted the armed wing of the Democratic Revolutionary Front (DRF) and intended to overthrow the revolutionary left-wing government of Fidel Castro. Launched from Guatemala, the invading force was defeated within three days by the Cuban armed forces, under the direct command of Prime Minister Fidel Castro.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles

If requires some kind of apology or reparations for past crimes, normalization of affairs between sovereign nations many nations would not have relations with the US. Mostly because the US has never really admitted some of these crimes...


Overthrowing Castro would not have been any more of a crime than Castro's revolution. Furthermore, Cuba targeted American civilians.

Of course there are two viewpoints. Where the Vietnamese government sees its long war against the US as a war of national Liberation... and the US invovlement as criminal ...the Us has another view.


Of course, Vietnam. #whataboutery.

You might read the history of Nicaragua and wonder why they have normal affairs with the US considering how badly they have been wronged...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... _Nicaragua


#whataboutery

really Fate, are you completely incapable of understanding that the other side might have some valid complaints too?


No, but the Castros don't have any "valid" complaints.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 10:11 am

Doctor Fate wrote:Cuban missile crisis. Cold War. Nearly ended the world. That kind of thing hurts feelings.
Yep and the missile crisis was over 50 years ago, and about the USSR v USA. The Cold War is over. Stop fighting it.

Which attacks on the US in the last 10-15 years have been assisted by Cuba, and which by other countries?


Which attacks has Cuba ever apologized and made reparations for?

I don't know, as you haven't described any recent attacks by Cuba yet. Neither country has much of a record for apologies for attacks on the other.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 10:43 am

danivon wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:Cuban missile crisis. Cold War. Nearly ended the world. That kind of thing hurts feelings.
Yep and the missile crisis was over 50 years ago, and about the USSR v USA. The Cold War is over. Stop fighting it.


The USSR is gone. Cuba and the "Cold War spirit" it embodies, remains. If they want to join the rest of the world, they can do something to show it.

Which attacks on the US in the last 10-15 years have been assisted by Cuba, and which by other countries?


Which attacks has Cuba ever apologized and made reparations for?

I don't know, as you haven't described any recent attacks by Cuba yet. Neither country has much of a record for apologies for attacks on the other.


You set the 10-15 year mark, I didn't. The question is this: is there any reason to simply grant Cuba amnesty?

Missile radar systems discovered aboard a North Korean-flagged ship that had last been in Cuba could be upgraded to make air-defense systems more effective at shooting down modern military aircraft, military analysts said Tuesday.

The North Korean ship was seized after inspectors found weapons system parts under sacks of sugar as it sought to cross the Panama Canal on its way to its home country, Panamanian President Ricardo Martinelli said Tuesday. North Korea is under a United Nations arms embargo. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl ... p/2520109/


Its connections to rogue regimes and its actions over the last half-century, would lead a prudent person to say "Show me."
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3741
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 20 Dec 2014, 11:32 am

It's a laudable goal to try to get Cuba to be better in its treatment of its people or else we will not trade with them...wait, we tried that for 55 years and it did not work. I don't think it would have been wise to put any pre-conditions on the deal. I think there is a better chance of things getting better with Cuba being less isolated. We 'll see. The only valid argument that I can see for not normalizing relations with Cuba is if it is shown to have ties to funding terrorism. I have not seen that argument made so I am guessing Cuba is not (at least recently) involved in any of that (I did read that it was in a list of such countries and Obama was thinking of taking them off of that).
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 11:48 am

Fate

The USSR is gone. Cuba and the "Cold War spirit" it embodies, remains. If they want to join the rest of the world, they can do something to show it


Join the rest of the world? You know who else participates in the embargo? No one.
You know which other nations have demonstrated support for th embargo?
Israel.
In moving to end the embargo and normalize relations it is the US that is joining the rest of the world..

he United Nations General Assembly has condemned the embargo as a violation of international law every year since 1992. Israel is the only country that routinely joins the U.S. in voting against the resolution[54] as has Palau every year from 2004 to 2008. On October 26, 2010, for the 19th time, the General Assembly condemned the embargo, 187 to 2 with 3 abstentions. Israel sided with the U.S., while Marshall Islands, Palau and Micronesia abstained.[55]


Fate
Its connections to rogue regimes and its actions over the last half-century, would lead a prudent person to say "Show me

Cuba is a popular nation throughout Latin America and South America. In large part because of it on the ground aid based on supply of public health.
When Haiti had its earth quake several hundred Cuban doctors and nurse and rescue workers were on site almost immediately ...

Panama invited Cuba to the next Summit of the Americas. And member nations of the hemishpere regularly criticize the embargo.

In effect, the embargo is just isolationist nonsense with no results and today, little purpose. Hell the US doesn't even really follow the embargo. The US is the fifth largest exporter to Cuba with exports representing almost 7% of Cuban imports ...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 12:00 pm

rickyp wrote:Fate

The USSR is gone. Cuba and the "Cold War spirit" it embodies, remains. If they want to join the rest of the world, they can do something to show it


Join the rest of the world? You know who else participates in the embargo? No one.
You know which other nations have demonstrated support for th embargo?
Israel.
In moving to end the embargo and normalize relations it is the US that is joining the rest of the world..


In demonstrating we lack morals? I agree.

I'm glad Israel is loyal.

When it comes to boycotts and embargoes, the "world" regularly puts money ahead of anything else. France and Germany are among the worst.

Next time you go to Cuba, why not take a trip to the prisons and tell those people you are helping them?

he United Nations General Assembly has condemned the embargo as a violation of international law every year since 1992. Israel is the only country that routinely joins the U.S. in voting against the resolution[54] as has Palau every year from 2004 to 2008. On October 26, 2010, for the 19th time, the General Assembly condemned the embargo, 187 to 2 with 3 abstentions. Israel sided with the U.S., while Marshall Islands, Palau and Micronesia abstained.[55]


I'm with you. The UN is useless. Thanks for demonstrating that.

Fate
Its connections to rogue regimes and its actions over the last half-century, would lead a prudent person to say "Show me

Cuba is a popular nation throughout Latin America and South America. In large part because of it on the ground aid based on supply of public health.
When Haiti had its earth quake several hundred Cuban doctors and nurse and rescue workers were on site almost immediately ...


Yeah, then again you probably think Venezuela is a peach of a country too.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 20 Dec 2014, 12:08 pm

freeman3 wrote:It's a laudable goal to try to get Cuba to be better in its treatment of its people or else we will not trade with them...wait, we tried that for 55 years and it did not work. I don't think it would have been wise to put any pre-conditions on the deal. I think there is a better chance of things getting better with Cuba being less isolated. We 'll see. The only valid argument that I can see for not normalizing relations with Cuba is if it is shown to have ties to funding terrorism. I have not seen that argument made so I am guessing Cuba is not (at least recently) involved in any of that (I did read that it was in a list of such countries and Obama was thinking of taking them off of that).


I think it would have been a fine thing to ask for something in return. Maybe something simple like returning one of America's Most Wanted fugitives to face justice? http://www.northjersey.com/news/n-j-sta ... -1.1161541

That should be easy, right?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3741
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 20 Dec 2014, 12:19 pm

Well, you always get as much as you can in negotiations, that 's true. Here is an article on the current status of human rights in Cuba.http://www.srnnews.com/human-rights-in- ... cuba-deal/