Why do we still have the economic embargo on Cuba?

C

Cyclone42

Guest
I just think the continuing economic embargo on Cuba is a complete anachronism. There really is no real reason it should continue to exist, other than political inertia. (We continue to do something simply because we've always done it, and not because it makes any sense to do it)

Cuba is a communist state, but so what? So are Vietnam and China, and we don't put economic sanctions on them. I think the real issue in today's world, the determining factor in whether or not we put economic sanctions on a country, is terrorism. Since Cuba does not really harbor terrorists nor encourage terrorism, economic sanctions don't make sense.

I think if we dropped the sanctions on Cuba tomorrow, the remains of that communist government would be over inside of a month.

What got me thinking about this is the following article I found on the World Herald site:

Omaha.com Metro/Region Section

I mean, Cuban cigars? He's going to prison over Cuban cigars? It's not like he imported cocaine! The last time I checked, tobacco products are still completely legal. And nobody was harmed by what he did. It's not like he murdered somebody or molested somebody's child.
 

joefrog

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2008
8,207
2,543
113
Clive, Iowa
The embargo lasts until Fidel and Raul are dead. Dead like Che. Dead like those communist bastards deserve. The American left has a man-crush on both Fidel and Che, that is why they think the embargo should be ended. Fidel let the Soviet Union put nuclear weapons aimed at the US on his country's soil. This is why the embargo continues. Actions have consequences in this world. Fidel chose poorly, and as long as he is in power and the people don't have the guts to rise up against him, they deserve for the embargo by the US to continue.

Not a whole lot of things get me worked up in this world, but you start in on global warming, taxation policies, gun control or communists and it is go time. Sorry if this offends some people at times, as I do tend to go overboard to sometimes make a point.

I like Cuban cigars too, but I can wait.
 

Harry

Active Member
Mar 27, 2006
299
31
28
The Cuban embargo still exist because neither political party wants to upset the Cuban vote in Florida. Though more Cuban Americans are starting to loosen their position on the embargo.
 

Stumpy

Well-Known Member
Apr 10, 2006
2,540
247
63
Tucson, AZ
The Cuban embargo still exist because neither political party wants to upset the Cuban vote in Florida. Though more Cuban Americans are starting to loosen their position on the embargo.

Bingo. It's not politically safe to lift the embargo due to Florida's strategic importance in the polls.

Also, as a holdover sentiment from the Cold War, many would attack such an action as unAmerican.

Incredibly poor reasons in my mind, but that's what it comes down to in my opinion.
 

brianhos

Moderator
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 1, 2006
56,714
30,020
113
Trenchtown
Cuban cigars are easy to get, you just go to a friendly country, and buy them, and then have them rewrapped in dominican labels. Errr ahhh so I have heard.
 

pulse

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2006
9,410
2,643
113
There's also the issue of economic freedom. Cuba/Castro seized all land owned by foreign-owned business, which I'm sure amounts to billions of dollars in today's terms.
 

alaskaguy

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
10,203
220
63
According to the State Department, Cuba remains on the list because it has “publicly opposed” the U.S.-led war on terror and maintains friendly relationships with other state sponsors of terrorism, like Iran. Cuba in the past has provided shelter to fugitives from U.S. justice without extradition and hosted members of terrorist organizations.

Link:
State Sponsors: Cuba - Council on Foreign Relations
 

balken

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2006
2,745
345
83
A better question is why we do not have an economic embargo on Canada. Celine Dion, Bryan Adams, Keanu Reeves, metric system, arctic fronts. Must I go on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmb

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
98,651
62,113
113
54
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
An extension of the Monroe Doctrine? The US owes much of it's security to the fact that it suffers no rivals in the immediate vicinity. Communism is not just another form of government. It is aggressive and subversive, and deserves the treatment that it gets from US policy.
 

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
45,438
14,303
113
There's also the issue of economic freedom. Cuba/Castro seized all land owned by foreign-owned business, which I'm sure amounts to billions of dollars in today's terms.

It wasn't like our US companies were exploiting things there in Cuba or that they had a corrupt government at the time of Castro's Revolution.

Not a fan of Castro at all. But we could possibly have had a much greater positive impact if we had dialogue and trade with Cuba. Everyone else does but us.
 

SaurianHenry

New Member
Jul 20, 2008
16
3
3
SaurianSagacity.com
Warning, long answer. But you can't expect a brief one when you ask about something as complicated as this.

First of all we don't have an embargo on Cuba "because Cuba is a communist state." The embargo was implemented by JFK as a punitive measure in response to the expropriation without compensation (theft) of $1.8 billion in American assets by the Castro regime.

The embargo is punishment for violating the common sense rules of international business "thou shall not steal". I'm glad you mentioned China. A little thing you may not know about China is that even after Nixon "opened" to China we still did not trade with that country for several years until China settled for similar expropriations in 1979. Granted it was a pennies on the dollar and China's expropriations from the 1940s were tiny compared to Cuba's in the 1960s but China basically said "we get it, we're sorry, it won't happen again."

Removing the embargo without first getting a similar gesture from the Cuban government sends a signal to Cuba and other countries that it's OK to steal from Americans as long as you are belligerent enough for long enough. If Cuba wants to be treated like China then they should do as China did.

By the way that's not the only difference between Cuba and China. China has privatized HUGE segments of its economy, allows private property, etc. etc. Cuba's economy is still about 90% state owned. In China there's at least the hope that as the Chinese middle class rises that it will demand political reforms in Cuba. But Cuba has resisted such economic reforms precisely because of their democratizing effects.

Lowering the embargo does not mean that American corporations will be able to go into Cuba and build strip malls and McDonalds franchises willy nilly. It means that only those American corporations that the regime deems acceptable will be able to conduct joint ventures, with the Cuban state holding the majority stake (the only way foreign companies are allowed to operate in Cuba), in only the industries that the central planners allow. All of the resource allocation decisions, employment decisions, compensation for workers decisions will be made by the same people who have been making disastrous decisions in Cuba for five decades: the communists.

The entire western world except the U.S. already invests in and does business with Cuba under these rules and it has not drown castro in capitalism.

Quite the opposite, it's extended castro a lifeline because he takes foreign money, squanders it and then finds a new group of suckers to take advantage of.

The only "trickle down" that can occur is what the communist party officials allow and to date they have never allowed enough trickle down to make a difference. The average worker in Cuba makes less than $20 a month. American corporations in Cuba won't be allowed to pay more than that. In fact they wouldn't pay the employees at all. They would (as all foreign companies) have to pay the Cuban state at a negotiated rate for workers supplied by the state's employment agency that pays the workers that $20 maximum. The difference goes to the bureaucrats and the state. It's an enabling of the regime not a destabilizing of it.

The real embargo in Cuba is the one the regime has put on its own people. It embargoes information, it embargoes freedom of speech, it embargoes freedom of movement and assembly it embargoes private property rights.

It's Cuba that needs to change it's policies not the U.S.

Lastly, the U.S. is currently Cuba's largest food supplier. Did you know that? There's an exception to the embargo for food and medicine that Cuba can buy for cash up front. This whole thing about the embargo is about two things, getting American tourist dollars (tourism in Cuba is down over the last few years and American tourists flocking to a once forbidden land will pump it up) and obtain credit. Because of the embargo Cuba can't borrow from certain international entities like the IMF and World Bank. Cuba wants credit because its free money it never has to pay back. Cuba's credit rating is garbage because it never pays anyone back. This is a country that had no foreign debt in 1959. Cuba now owes more than $15 billion to various countries and that doesn't include the Soviet Era debt it owes the Russians. It's all a shell game. The next suckers: the Americans.
 

SaurianHenry

New Member
Jul 20, 2008
16
3
3
SaurianSagacity.com
It wasn't like our US companies were exploiting things there in Cuba or that they had a corrupt government at the time of Castro's Revolution.

Not a fan of Castro at all. But we could possibly have had a much greater positive impact if we had dialogue and trade with Cuba. Everyone else does but us.

Everyone else does. And how has that changed the situation in Cuba?

I don't think the conditions for political prisoners in Cuba have gotten appreciably better since Canadian, British, French and other tourists began flooding the island almost 20 years ago.
 

SaurianHenry

New Member
Jul 20, 2008
16
3
3
SaurianSagacity.com
An extension of the Monroe Doctrine? The US owes much of it's security to the fact that it suffers no rivals in the immediate vicinity. Communism is not just another form of government. It is aggressive and subversive, and deserves the treatment that it gets from US policy.

Let's not forget that Cuba allowed itself to become a base for Soviet Missiles that could reach Washington, it subverted and attempted to subvert Colombia, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Grenada and El Salvador. That's just in the Western Hemisphere. Let's not forget about Angola and the Congo.

It may be tempting to think about the cold war as a quaint thing of the past that never really posed a threat to the U.S. but as late as 1988 the outcome was anything but certain. Castro is a bad actor and not the legitimate leader of Cuba.
 

SaurianHenry

New Member
Jul 20, 2008
16
3
3
SaurianSagacity.com
According to the State Department, Cuba remains on the list because it has “publicly opposedâ€￾ the U.S.-led war on terror and maintains friendly relationships with other state sponsors of terrorism, like Iran. Cuba in the past has provided shelter to fugitives from U.S. justice without extradition and hosted members of terrorist organizations.

Link:
State Sponsors: Cuba - Council on Foreign Relations

Cuba continues to harbor scores of international terrorists including American cop killers.

US Fugitives in Cuba
 

AIT

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
2,743
101
63
Johnston, IA
The embargo is punishment for violating the common sense rules of international business "thou shall not steal". I'm glad you mentioned China. A little thing you may not know about China is that even after Nixon "opened" to China we still did not trade with that country for several years until China settled for similar expropriations in 1979. Granted it was a pennies on the dollar and China's expropriations from the 1940s were tiny compared to Cuba's in the 1960s but China basically said "we get it, we're sorry, it won't happen again."

Removing the embargo without first getting a similar gesture from the Cuban government sends a signal to Cuba and other countries that it's OK to steal from Americans as long as you are belligerent enough for long enough. If Cuba wants to be treated like China then they should do as China did.

If Cuba made a similar gesture, expropriations of pennies on the dollar, would that lift the embargo?
 

SaurianHenry

New Member
Jul 20, 2008
16
3
3
SaurianSagacity.com
If Cuba made a similar gesture, expropriations of pennies on the dollar, would that lift the embargo?

I suppose you mean reparations of pennies on the dollar. The answer under current U.S. law is no. That's because in 1996 the Congress passed and President Clinton signed something called the Helms-Burton act which requires several conditions/political changes in Cuba before the embargo can be lifted. The conditions include no negotiations with either of the Castro brothers and unconditional freedom for Cuba's internationally recognized political prisoners as well as an opening for political opposition on the island.

It should be noted that the bill was unlikely to have passed much less have been signed by the president but in 1996 Castro ordered the shootdown of two U.S. Civilian aircraft being flown by an exile organization called "Brothers to the Rescue" which had on previous occasions violated Cuban airspace and dropped leaflets over Havana. Neither of the two aircraft shot down in 1996 had violated Cuban airspace on the day in question.

Killed on the planes were three American citizens and one Cuban-American legal resident of the U.S.

The Helms-Burton law was the U.S. "retaliation" for the shoot down.

Removing the embargo would require an act of congress, an act that would say "we didn't mean it back then when you killed four Americans".
 

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
45,438
14,303
113
Let's not forget that Cuba allowed itself to become a base for Soviet Missiles that could reach Washington, it subverted and attempted to subvert Colombia, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Grenada and El Salvador. That's just in the Western Hemisphere. Let's not forget about Angola and the Congo.

It may be tempting to think about the cold war as a quaint thing of the past that never really posed a threat to the U.S. but as late as 1988 the outcome was anything but certain. Castro is a bad actor and not the legitimate leader of Cuba.

I am certain that you realize that Castro went to visit with Eisenhower shortly after the Revolution in which they ousted the Dictator Batista. Instead of meeting with Castro, Eisenhower went golfing. Perhaps, just maybe if we had met with him, he wouldn't have been so friendly to the Russians. It is no big secret that Batista was corrupt and was friendly to mobsters and big businesses who exploited Cuba and the Cuban people. And I don't really like Castro.

But who do think is the legitimate leader of Cuba?
 

AIT

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
2,743
101
63
Johnston, IA
I suppose you mean reparations of pennies on the dollar. The answer under current U.S. law is no. That's because in 1996 the Congress passed and President Clinton signed something called the Helms-Burton act which requires several conditions/political changes in Cuba before the embargo can be lifted. The conditions include no negotiations with either of the Castro brothers and unconditional freedom for Cuba's internationally recognized political prisoners as well as an opening for political opposition on the island.

(Sorry I'm chopping these long answers down when quoting)

It sounds like the US won't do anything until Cuba makes major concessions they're unwilling to do. Hence the stalemate.
 

ketelmeister

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2006
4,274
187
63
I went to Cuba a couple of years ago...an interesting place to visit. Reason we don't lift the embargo is that we would have to recognize the current government as legitimate. That would negate any claims the Cubans who fled to Florida 50 years ago to get their land back. There are 200,000 former Cubans in Miami, and they want their land back. They tend to vote as a block. Make them mad and you lose Florida. Clinton and Bush both figured that out. Having said that, I agree we need to open up trade and move on. It would be best for our interest.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron