Well thats alright the administration stated that Cuba was open to negotiations on virtually all aspects or trade and ending the embargo.

Unfortunatly the elder Castro (Fidel) came out and stated (paraphrased) "Thats not what I said !"

When you get right down to it the last thing Castro wants is open free contact with the outside world. He is just fine in his role of a despot.

So I fail to see what a visit by some Govener is supposed to accompliish.

As usual, it is not so much about the leaders of such countries, but their ppl. And the more sympathy the ppl have for the US, the harder it is for their respective leadership to wage their propaganda affairs to stay in power. As with Iran, in such a way the government is destabilised.

Simple.

Agreed. Really, at this point, is Cuba really a threat? Hardly. Good Lord, they have the largest collection of cars from the 50's and they are taxi cabs. It is probably time to explore opening the doors to some trade and tourists.

Also has to do with the large amount of Cuban-American voters in Florida.

Yes, probably an underlying factor for sure. We have seen how this administration plays. :shifty:

What I meant was, it was politically beneficial to keep the embargo in place, due to the large amount of anti-Castro voters in Florida.

Ah, thanks for that, Warhawk, missed it the first time I revisited this thread.

But is this really the same embargo imposed on Cuba in the course of the Cuba crisis? Just wondering, back then Cuba was cut of from all trade, esepcially russian shipping, not just US trade.

Yah. that works :)

Seriously, Cuba has been under a dictator as long as I have been alive. I know to some, that's no big deal but to me dictator = bad in every case.

Indeed, having grown up in south florida I know first hand how this rolls.

The curious thing is that most cuban americans were staunch conservative Reganites whom sought only one thing, the downfall of the Castro's.

But give them a chance to send money 'home' or being able to bring friends and family to the US and they will be all over it.

The latest indications that the US policy towards Cuba will become a bit more relaxed, has my support. Can't say the same regarding today'S new'S reports that due to a more relaxed US stance European diplomacy dares to start becoming closer with Hamas.

The "Obama doctrine" to start playing more softly with everybody, no matter whom, seems to produce a bag of mixed results, depending on the faction that gets treatment by it. In case of Cuba, I see little or no problem with it. With regard to Hamas and Iran, or any Islamic faction, I see US diplomacy being pushed into the defensive, and EU diplomacy becoming even more submissive to Islam. Regarding Pakistan and promising to give them even more money, I label that as a naive folly. Regarding North Korea - cannot judge at this time.

But Cuba -well, for the sake of the Cuban people, yes, try something new there, the past 40 years have not created anything more than a big block of ice - and Castro probably was the one Cuban suffering not at all from that. whenever I heared tourists reporting about their experience with the Cubans, they always seem to have only good things to say, how friendly they are despite their economic misery, how relaxed life is going despite the problems, and that one must not be afraid to walk alone on the city's streets in the middle of the night.

It cannot all be bad about Cuba. One of the very few remaining places on earth I eventually would consider to give one more travel to.

Yes, that is about it. If you are shipping nukes from Russia to Cuba, 80 miles off our shores, you pretty much done with anything and are under the glass. (as a side note, the USS Torsk was part of that picket to turn the Russian ships around). Not to mention, Cuba is Communist with a dictator. Basically on the other side of the spectrum of how the US operates.

Ah, totally missed your point. Sorry sir!:salute:

Same as I Neal. Cuba has always been under the thumb since I was a kid. Heck, my dad was almost part of the Bay of Pigs. His number was not selected and he did not go.

I thought Castro was old now and had stepped aside for his younger brother Raul......or is this just a smokescreen? :hmmm:

http://www.economist.com/world/ameri...ry_id=13518718

Yeah, but the Embargo we are talking about now just applies to trade inbetween Cuba and the US, it's not a complete cut off from the rest of the world like at the times of the crisis. Insofar I always wondered about the usefulness of this embargo anyways, it beeing more a principle then a problem solving or pratical measure. Disliking Castro and detaining communism is more then understandable in my book, but one should have thought it has to go hand in hand with a plan for future action based on possible outcomes.

This, however, has never been done, at least not in a proportion that I heared about it, yet. It appears to be a measure taken out of the circumstances back then and just carried over because nobody ever really thought about what to do next. To just sit it out until Castro dies and communism hopefully with him does not make the impression of a seriously thought out plan to bring this conflict to an end. At latest when the USSR collapsed this thought process could have started.

Insofar I do not see any harm in opening up to Cuba, really. It's a place in dire need of modernisation and investments, it's a win win, really. And if things go wrong after all, for some reason, the US surely is large and powerful enough to respond in kind before Cuba becomes dangerous in whatever regard.