so I see, lets just watch cuba become the next north korea, we'll subsidize the misery...yea..great stuff that....

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

Yep, pretty much. But otherwise the whole house of cards would collapse. It will be interesting to see what happens to the republican lock on S. FL due to the fantantical anti-Castro nutjobs when and if all restrictions are lifted. It could change the face of presidential elections when they're shown to be the hair-on-fire lunatics that they are, hiding behind ghosts.

__________________
All things serve The Beam

Since when is free trade and allowing U.S. citizens to make their own decisions a subsidy? Is that what The WSJ's editorial page is calling it these days?

This will do more to undermine the regime than the embargo ever did.
Engagement works much better than confrontation.
Having Cuban-Americans visit their families, spread some coin, and boost the local economy, will create a powerful desire in the Cuban people to enjoy the fruits of Democracy that their relatives to the north enjoy.

Heck, lift the embargo completely, and flood the place with Yanquis and greenbacks, it'll happen even faster.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

I think most Cuban-Americans are happy with this, they aren't holding out any real hope that the embargo will work, and they want to visit their homeland again before they die.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

The last is how I see it for the reasons you said. If it's going to be done, then it's best to do it right. Just allow Americans to travel and invest there.

Given Cuba's policy regarding Cuban emigres and their American born children being Cuban citizens only in their view, it could get a bit sticky in what the regime might do to them when there (accuse them of treason, detain them for that or other reasons on account of considering them to be Cuban citizens only, etc). I think it would be harder to claim and do that to them if travel was opened generally because the politics of doing it would get harder. Domestically, I also don't think Cubans would want to lose the returned tourism and warming of relations and that puts additional pressure on the regime not to mess around with Cuban Americans there.

__________________

The next North Korea ? No way.
Since Luxembourgs Grand duchess is a born Cuban the Grand Duchy finances a lot of development projects on the island, and last year I had the opportunity to visit some of them.
Cubans seemed to me a very open, hospitable, well educated and enterprising people who will tolerate the regime as long as it ensures ( compared to other countries in the region like the Dominican republic or Haiti) a relatively high living standard ( for example free education, health care and functioning public services). People were openly talking about politics and even bashing Fidel without seeming afraid to do so, and i don´t think they were just doing it for the foreign press.
The embargo has ultimately not been sucessful in its goal, it is anachronistic and especially since there are certainly worse human rights offenders with whom the US regularly trades (China, Saudi-Arabia) without justification. Especially at a time when Obama reaches out to enemies like Iran, or keeps up relations with a governement that has just legalized rape in a marriage and severely cut back womens rights ( Afghanistan), there is no logical reason not to try a cleanup of relations with Cuba, whose rulers seem in spite of human rights violations compared to the Mullahs rather like grumpy grandpas.

I guess the question is do we, as a country or govt, support freedom and democracy all the time, or some of the time? Cuba is a dictatorship, where the dictator uses the military to keep himself in power, and denies his people basic needs and rights. Any dissent or attempt to change the system is met with violence. It has been the policy of the US not to purchase or sell goods to countries that rise to a certain level of such lack of freedom in order not to help keep them in power.

Another question is had we not had an embargo, would Cuba look like Puerto Rico or Venezuela?

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

And another question is if not the embargo itself has allowed the Communists to stay in power ?
And also if that was the US policy, how many dictatorships you have among your valuable trade partners that you would also have to embargo ?

That is why I said there is a certain level at which we embargo. North Korea, Iran for example. Its not dictators neccesarily but a certain level of lack of freedom. And yeah, we dont know if the embargo allowed theme to stay in power. Perhaps lifting the embargo would have simply made them stronger as they would have access to all sorts of technology.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

1. China, Saudi- Arabia ( which is certainly not a less serious offender than Iran) ,Afghanistan ( womens rights and new law signed by the president ) , where is your level ?

2. Hardly, since other nations never joined your embargo, and there are also ways to ensure no critical technology is beeing exported aside of an embargo.

Cuba just buys US goods from other countries, so it's not like our embargo is even that effective. Despite a 50 year embargo, we're the 7th largest exporter to Cuba.

__________________
“For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” - Carl Sagan

Umm, we invaded Afghanistan and have 40k troops on station dealing with things there. They have a constitution and free elections. Rights are legally protected, if not always enforced, and we are directly involved with said protection. Saudia Arabia has a very free market system, definite human rights issues, as does China. I would not say they rise to the level of North Korea or Cuba. Iran is embargoed for other reasons than human rights, as are most countries. Cuba was embargoed for other than human rights and freedom reasons as well. Point being, my level and the US level are different. The US level is very high, meaning we dont do a general sanctions unless their is a security threat or very significant human rights abuses.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

I imagine given the proximity and natural resources available in cuba, they would be 10x as strong economically with the US as its top exporter. And Fidel would have 10x the money to maintain power, much as Venezeula does with our fuel purchases.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

While this is just a partial list.....

Abacha, General Sani ----------------------------Nigeria
Amin, Idi ------------------------------------------Uganda
Banzer, Colonel Hugo ---------------------------Bolivia
Batista, Fulgencio --------------------------------Cuba
Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal ----------------------------Brunei
Botha, P.W. ---------------------------------------South Africa
Branco, General Humberto ---------------------Brazil
Cedras, Raoul -------------------------------------Haiti
Cerezo, Vinicio -----------------------------------Guatemala
Chiang Kai-Shek ---------------------------------Taiwan
Cordova, Roberto Suazo ------------------------Honduras
Christiani, Alfredo -------------------------------El Salvador
Diem, Ngo Dihn ---------------------------------Vietnam
Doe, General Samuel ----------------------------Liberia
Duvalier, Francois --------------------------------Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude-----------------------------Haiti
Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King ---------------------Saudi Arabia
Franco, General Francisco -----------------------Spain
Hitler, Adolf ---------------------------------------Germany
Hassan II-------------------------------------------Morocco
Marcos, Ferdinand -------------------------------Philippines
Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez ---El Salvador
Mobutu Sese Seko -------------------------------Zaire
Noriega, General Manuel ------------------------Panama
Ozal, Turgut --------------------------------------Turkey
Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza ---------------Iran
Papadopoulos, George --------------------------Greece
Park Chung Hee ---------------------------------South Korea
Pinochet, General Augusto ---------------------Chile
Pol Pot---------------------------------------------Cambodia
Rabuka, General Sitiveni ------------------------Fiji
Montt, General Efrain Rios ---------------------Guatemala
Salassie, Halie ------------------------------------Ethiopia
Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira --------------------Portugal
Somoza, Anastasio Jr. --------------------------Nicaragua
Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. -------------------------Nicaragua
Smith, Ian ----------------------------------------Rhodesia
Stroessner, Alfredo -----------------------------Paraguay
Suharto, General ---------------------------------Indonesia
Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas -----------------------Dominican Republic
Videla, General Jorge Rafael ------------------Argentina
Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed ----------------------Pakistan

What were you saying about us supporting (or not supporting) dictatorships?

__________________
All things serve The Beam