Dump the Cuban Embargo

[macjoe53]

Originally Posted by NCRadioMan

Speaking of why they are still in power, I have a crack-pot theory:

The Cuban Govn't had JFK killed. The US Govn't didn't want the public to know that a very small commie island could do such a thing to the mighty US. So, they made a deal with Castro's that they could stay in power until thier death as long as they never revealed that they were behind the assasination. Why else havn't we liberated Cuba? We have "liberated" dozens of other countires but have never tried in Cuba since the death of JFK.

See, I told you it was a crack-pot theory. There are alot of those around today, though.

My crack-pot theory has always been that the embargo is still in place because Saint John Kennedy put it into place and the democrats feel in office feel that it would be a sacrilege to remove the embargo and dishonor the memory of the President who was obviously the best president we've ever had (note sarcasm here).

[chenvt]

Originally Posted by Fenwick

I think it should remain in place so long as the Cuban government keeps on doing the things that led it to be enacted in the first place.

They have to clean up their act with respect to human rights violations and playing nice with other countries.

Until then, they're just going to have to suffer the consequences of their bad behavior.

I have to disagree with this. If the argument is that human rights violations and their attitude towards other countries should be a reason for an embargo, what about China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and other countries that consistently have violated human rights?

Such countries can arguably be considered worse, but due to the fact that their economy and resources have strategic benefits for the United States, we might give the occasional press statement of "we're concerned and are talking to their diplomats". But sanctions? Come on, not in a million years.

I would attribute much of this to the cuban american population in florida, which is a key state in elections. Like it or not, it is an excellent example of a minority population in the United States being able to have leverage regardless of a majority opinion.

It could also be argued that once increased trade and commerce with the then-Soviet Union increased, we saw an acceleration towards democracy. You can even see that in bits and pieces as China has increased its integration into the global economy.

[Snake Hips]

Originally Posted by icehog3

So, for instance, if you buy heroin in Canada, bringing it into the US shouldn't be a problem since you have already hampered the efforts against Colombian Drug Lords in Canada?

It isn't just a matter of the economic damage done to the Embargo effort done by buying the cigars....it is illegal to possess Cuban cigars in the U.S.... So, you have damaged the Embargo effort out of the country, but you have also broken the law when you bring them in to the U.S. .

That's what I mean. That it's illegal to possess them is what I'm bothered with. Simply having them doesn't benefit Cuba or damage the embargo effort like buying them does. I'm just trying to say that it's a little dumb to have it be illegal to possess them or bring them into the country when it's the act of buying them that actually does the "damage."

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by Snake Hips

That's what I mean. That it's illegal to possess them is what I'm bothered with. Simply having them doesn't benefit Cuba or damage the embargo effort like buying them does. I'm just trying to say that it's a little dumb to have it be illegal to possess them or bring them into the country when it's the act of buying them that actually does the "damage."

Because in reality the embargo is much more a political issue than it is an economic one.

[Fenwick]

Originally Posted by chenvt

I have to disagree with this. If the argument is that human rights violations and their attitude towards other countries should be a reason for an embargo, what about China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and other countries that consistently have violated human rights?

Such countries can arguably be considered worse, but due to the fact that their economy and resources have strategic benefits for the United States, we might give the occasional press statement of "we're concerned and are talking to their diplomats". But sanctions? Come on, not in a million years.

I would attribute much of this to the cuban american population in florida, which is a key state in elections. Like it or not, it is an excellent example of a minority population in the United States being able to have leverage regardless of a majority opinion.

It could also be argued that once increased trade and commerce with the then-Soviet Union increased, we saw an acceleration towards democracy. You can even see that in bits and pieces as China has increased its integration into the global economy.

Yes, point well taken. I probably should have done more research and presented a stronger argument to support my statement but I did not and you have an excellent rebuttal. And I agree with you that the Cubans who fled to Florida do indeed have a significant influence with our keeping the Trading With the Enemy Act in effect.

However I'm not sure I agree with you that there is a "majority opinion" that wants the Act lifted other than those interested in smoking Cuban cigars. In my opinion, a huge majority of the United States population is indifferent on the topic which probably explains why it doesn't attract much attention or time in Washington, DC.

[chenvt]

Originally Posted by Fenwick

Yes, point well taken. I probably should have done more research and presented a stronger argument to support my statement but I did not and you have an excellent rebuttal. And I agree with you that the Cubans who fled to Florida do indeed have a significant influence with our keeping the Trading With the Enemy Act in effect.

However I'm not sure I agree with you that there is a "majority opinion" that wants the Act lifted other than those interested in smoking Cuban cigars. In my opinion, a huge majority of the United States population is indifferent on the topic which probably explains why it doesn't attract much attention or time in Washington, DC.

Agreed. It's really a non-issue when you think about the grand scheme of things in the US. In fact, it's funny if you read the facts on how much the US government devotes to this embargo:
-Between 2000 and 2006, 61% of the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control's casework was on Cuba Embargo. Mind you, this is greater than countries known as narcotic hubs.
-DHS secondary inspections are 20% higher on charter passengers arriving from Cuba at Miami Airport (These are people who have persmission to go to Cuba)

Seriously, we don't have better things for our border police to be working on? I guess I'm just frustrated at the hypocricy where we have a nominal national security threat from Cuba versus other countries.

[orca99usa]

Seriously, we don't have better things for our border police to be working on?

I had much rather spend the money and effort on curtailing terrorism.

At least publicly, the embargo exists to force Castro out of power. In that, it has been a miserable failure. Only age and ill health forced him out. I also advance that it gave him an excuse to stay in power as long as possible, and through any means at his disposal. It probably also played a role in him turning power over to his brother, with a determination to change as little as possible. We have done, and are doing, business with regimes with far worse records in human rights and providing for the country's citizens.

I am a child of the Cuban missile crisis, and my father was in the military in Florida when it happened. I have vivid memories of the times. The Russians, who were supposedly the villains, normalized relations with us long ago. If I could walk up and put my hands on a Russian Sukhoi SU-27 at an American air show in 1989, I see no reason I cannot put my hands on a Cuban Cohiba in 2008 (well, actually I can, but that's a different story).

If we want to effect real change in Cuba, it seems to me that the best way to do it is to expose Cubans to America in doses they never dreamed of - through travel, tourism, exchange of goods and cultural exchanges. Let them see what they have been missing, and then let them push for change from within.

Or, we can remain the lone bully on the block and stand alone while the rest of the world refuses to duplicate our failure.

[Rolando]

I write a letter to the president about once a year in support of ending the embargo. I find it to be the worst kind of hypocrisy for us to target only military points of interest when we attack a country and we target civillian when we impose long-term embargos.

It didn't work. It is time to end it and try to bring them back into the fold through peaceful means.

[jamesb3]

My relpy is simple-end it, it is time.

[krisko]

Originally Posted by macjoe53

My crack-pot theory has always been that the embargo is still in place because Saint John Kennedy put it into place and the democrats feel in office feel that it would be a sacrilege to remove the embargo and dishonor the memory of the President who was obviously the best president we've ever had (note sarcasm here).

It may or may not be 'crack-pot' but it's definitely a theory I've never heard before. Well done for putting an interesting spin on it.

Originally Posted by orca99usa

If we want to effect real change in Cuba, it seems to me that the best way to do it is to expose Cubans to America in doses they never dreamed of - through travel, tourism, exchange of goods and cultural exchanges. Let them see what they have been missing, and then let them push for change from within.

Quoted for relevance. Or I guess I could've just said 'What he said!'.

[krisko]

Originally Posted by Snake Hips

I get how I'm damaging the embargo effort by buying them at all, even in another country, but my discrimination between buying and bringing in is the futility of not allowing me to take them into the country after I have already done business with Cuba. I bought the cigars, the damage is done - how is the act of taking the product into the country going to aid Cuba any further than the act of buying the cigars? It won't. I'm just saying that it's kind of dumb to not allow me to take them back into the country after I violated the embargo to the best of my ability by buying them. The money transaction with a Cuban company damages the embargo effort - taking the product into the country doesn't.

Morally there is no difference between purchasing CCs and being in posession of them. In other words, if you are allowed to bring them into the country, there is nothing stopping you from purchasing them. I see the point you are making, but all you're really trying to do is justify breaking your country's embargo of Cuba.

Incidentally I'm not judging you. I have a long history of ignoring the rules that don't jive with my lifestyle, the embargo included. You might say I have a certain 'moral flexibility'.

[ZedR2]

And how many Habanos does 'Arnold' have in his Humi (?) thousands if not more , I have seen him up here buying them , I bet he is not the only US politician stocked with Habanos but the rules don't apply to them !

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by ZedR2

And how many Habanos does 'Arnold' have in his Humi (?) thousands if not more , I have seen him up here buying them , I bet he is not the only US politician stocked with Habanos but the rules don't apply to them !

Next time get a picture please.

[Biglizard1]

Originally Posted by Rolando

I write a letter to the president about once a year in support of ending the embargo. I find it to be the worst kind of hypocrisy for us to target only military points of interest when we attack a country and we target civillian when we impose long-term embargos.

It didn't work. It is time to end it and try to bring them back into the fold through peaceful means.

I think this fellow newb has a great point of view and maybe it is worth looking at getting some of our family and friends to write our politicians and get this some more attention!
Maybe some of our pols would like to enjoy a cigar as much as some of us!

[oldforge]

Originally Posted by ZedR2

And how many Habanos does 'Arnold' have in his Humi (?) thousands if not more , I have seen him up here buying them , I bet he is not the only US politician stocked with Habanos but the rules don't apply to them !

Former CT Governor Rowland was convicted in a classic contracting kickback case a few years back. His kickbacks included clothes, dinners, liquor, and (alleged :-) ) Cuban cigars.