WinterFox

U.S. Politics: And a Happy "Shithole" Year

431 posts in this topic

4 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Ok, but what if he said it about another American leader who committed acts of war, jailed millions, murdered many more, destroyed families, and so on?  Like say, Dubya?  Or even Obama?  Because Trudeau wasn't talking about a long dead person, he was talking about someone who lived during all of our lifetimes, and one that isn't in any way comparable to Andrew Jackson.

And this isn't about Americans being discounted.  It's that this particular American is clearly speaking from of place of being blinded by American propaganda.  He literally talks like he read a child's "Communism is really bad and so is Castro" book. 

He listed objective and verifiable facts about Castro's regime. Whether or not you put much relative, moral weight in those facts is up to you, but to deny their existence makes you look stupid. 

I don't think Obama is equally as bad as Castro, though we may disagree, but I would have no problem shitting on Trudeau if he said the same thing about Dubya. I take your point about the recency of Castro's death, but I think there are plenty of ways to go about not actively celebrating his regime while still remaining politically tactful, as many if not most other world leaders did regarding his death. 

Edited by IamMe90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Who's arguing against this?  This discussion started with me taking issue with Trudeau celebrating Castro.  If he celebrated, say, Pinochet, then yeah I'd have a (bigger) problem with that too.  Anyway, no credible source denies that Castro presided over many executions without due process (and yes, many of these murders were popular - so what?); as well as the forced labor camps and torture of political prisoners.  You don't seem to be denying this, right?  So, why do you think I'm wrong in saying Castro should not be celebrated?  And isn't saying the regime "treated their opposition harshly" an offensive understatement?  And why does it matter that I'm American?  Would my opinion be more valid if I was from another country?

I also did not want to get specific on numbers of killings/torture because (1) as your second link details, there are many different estimates on this:

And (2) some of the difficulty in this is due to what is explained in your first link:

Also from that first link, btw:

 

Celebrating Castro? Sure, right across Canada we hold dances in his honour, with fireworks at midnight!

Cuba and Canada have been friends for decades. Their leader, beloved by the vast majority of people in the country (Cuban exiles in Florida really don't count) died. The man was a personal friend of Trudeau's father. He expressed a gracious expression of sorrow at his death. Castro was grieved by, ya know, 11 and half million people.

Castro and his supporters threw the scum out of Cuba. He then reached out to the USA for support. The USA told him to fuck off and spent the next 50 years trying to kill him and overturn his government. What the hell do you think happens after a revolution? Americans did not kill and torture British supporters during your revolution, right? Oh let's see, 25,000 Revolutionary soldiers, yes that's what you guys call them, died, and 24,000 British. The population of the US was 2.5 million, for fuck's sake! They didn't try to invade Canada and kill more people? Oh gee, 15,000 US soldiers and 8,500 British and Canadian soldiers didn't die because of fucking American imperialism, 1812 style?

The population of Cuba was 7 million in 1959. How many soldiers did Castro lose? His army was 200 people, Batista had 37,000. Castro said he lost 9 in battle, and 56 were captured by Batista forces and executed. Castro took over Cuba without opposition, while military leaders left the country or headed for the hills. 200 soldiers and police were put on trial for corruption, torture and other crimes against Cubans, and were executed. Most Batista soldiers were allowed to go home without any charges, and officers went into exile. After the revolution pretty well anyone who wanted to leave left for Florida, and continued to leave for years until finally the Castro stopped allowing people to leave. No, he did not imprison and torture "a substantial portion of the population". That's where Dr. Pepper is absolutely right, you're a propaganda clown.

The fact you say 'many more were executed' according to my links makes me laugh. It's like Senator Joe McCarthy, always adding to the numbers of 'known communists' in the US government, the numbers keep going up. Amnesty International I respect, US government backed Cubans in exile I don't trust. Do you think Thomas Skidmore got his numbers from the Cuban government or the US government? The government that was lying to the people of the US about their involvement in Viet Nam? The Pentagon Papers? And did you not even read how the numbers of political prisoners were compiled? Did I say the number was from Amnesty International? No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

 And why does it matter that I'm American? 

 

US people are uniquely primed to get hot and bothered about Cuba. The issue isn't about how bad the Communist regime in Cuba is. The issue is why the US singles Cuba out for special attention over and above other countries that are as bad or worse. By all appearances it looks like the reason is there is a sizeable voting bloc of Cuban exiles (or the descendants of Cuban exiles) living mostly in Florida, who will vote enmass against any politician who suggests a relationship with Cuba that lines US-Cuba relations along similar lines as US relations other countries with similar political systems and human rights issues.

People from other countries are aware of the history and current situation in Cuba, we just don't get why US people see Cuba as a special case of evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Their leader, beloved by the vast majority of people in the country (Cuban exiles in Florida really don't count) died.

Well, it's great to know Cuban exiles don't count.

2 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Castro and his supporters threw the scum out of Cuba. He then reached out to the USA for support. The USA told him to fuck off and spent the next 50 years trying to kill him and overturn his government.

Well, no, he also threw out the American scum - namely the mafia interests that propped up the Batista regime - and nationalized US property in Cuba.  That's when Eisenhower told him to fuck off. 

7 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

The fact you say 'many more were executed' according to my links makes me laugh. It's like Senator Joe McCarthy, always adding to the numbers of 'known communists' in the US government, the numbers keep going up.

How is citing a paragraph from a link you provided to demonstrate there is wide disagreement on the number of executions "adding to the numbers?"  You mention you respect Amnesty International - what about the fact they've been barred from Cuba since 1990?  What about Human Rights Watch and Freedom House, and what they say about the Castro regime and political repression?  Again, no one here is defending the US.  It's just that some of us are able to evaluate Castro on his merits.  Are some of his actions very understandable due to the pressures and treatment of the US?  Certainly.  But this does not excuse his treatment of political dissidents.

9 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Most Batista soldiers were allowed to go home without any charges, and officers went into exile. After the revolution pretty well anyone who wanted to leave left for Florida, and continued to leave for years until finally the Castro stopped allowing people to leave. No, he did not imprison and torture "a substantial portion of the population". That's where Dr. Pepper is absolutely right, you're a propaganda clown.

Except the problem here is according to many the executions didn't stop after the revolution with Castro stabilizing his power.  And the forced labor camps and torture inarguably did not either.  And casting the people who fled to Florida as those that simply "wanted to leave" is what is propaganda.*  They fled out of fear of persecution, and many had nothing to do with the Batista regime but rather had the temerity to criticize the Castro regime.  The vast majority of them did not "want to leave" their families, homes, and country.

 

*BTW, I see I did leave out exile one time when I was referring to the "substantial portion of the population."  I sincerely apologize, but this is what I meant, as was stated in my first response, e.g. "large group of Cubans Castro killed, tortured, and exiled."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

US people are uniquely primed to get hot and bothered about Cuba. The issue isn't about how bad the Communist regime in Cuba is. The issue is why the US singles Cuba out for special attention over and above other countries that are as bad or worse. By all appearances it looks like the reason is there is a sizeable voting bloc of Cuban exiles (or the descendants of Cuban exiles) living mostly in Florida, who will vote enmass against any politician who suggests a relationship with Cuba that lines US-Cuba relations along similar lines as US relations other countries with similar political systems and human rights issues.

Yeah, as I said pages back, this constituency is thankfully dying off.  Once Trump leaves office, hopefully we can get back to opening up relations with Cuba.

28 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

People from other countries are aware of the history and current situation in Cuba, we just don't get why US people see Cuba as a special case of evil.

No, the Castro regime is certainly not a special case of evil.  But pointing out their atrocities and why it's naive to willfully ignore such while painting Castro as a beloved hero apparently means you're a McCarthyist propagandist, even though I don't think I've mentioned communism once until now (and that's because Castro's actions have nothing to do with communism).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, IamMe90 said:

He listed objective and verifiable facts about Castro's regime. Whether or not you put much relative, moral weight in those facts is up to you, but to deny their existence makes you look stupid. 

I don't think Obama is equally as bad as Castro, though we may disagree, but I would have no problem shitting on Trudeau if he said the same thing about Dubya. I take your point about the recency of Castro's death, but I think there are plenty of ways to go about not actively celebrating his regime while still remaining politically tactful, as many if not most other world leaders did regarding his death. 

The problem with dmc isn't that he listed 'facts'.  It's that he claimed that Trudeau was wrong in making a statement about Castro upon his death.  Dmc is coming from a place of American propaganda where Castro is to be looked upon as scum, and that's it.  As a special case of evil.  

I didn't list Dubya or Obama to claim they are equal.  Merely that these are two recent leaders who have committed some serious atrocities.  I love Obama, but I can't deny that he was head of a military and country that tortured and imprisoned people without due process, that he murdered civilians by the hundreds with drone wars, that has some of the lowest education standards in the first world, that has some of the highest infant and maternal mortality rates, and so on and so forth.  If Amnesty International and other human rights groups adequately reported on the US, we'd be total shit.  A special type of evil.  

Trudeau didn't do anything unique in making positive commentary about Castro.  Cuba had different relationships with the rest of the world than they did with America.  The person who looks stupid here is the one who claims that Trudeau stumbled by acknowledging that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Well, it's great to know Cuban exiles don't count.

Well, no, he also threw out the American scum - namely the mafia interests that propped up the Batista regime - and nationalized US property in Cuba.  That's when Eisenhower told him to fuck off. 

How is citing a paragraph from a link you provided to demonstrate there is wide disagreement on the number of executions "adding to the numbers?"  You mention you respect Amnesty International - what about the fact they've been barred from Cuba since 1990?  What about Human Rights Watch and Freedom House, and what they say about the Castro regime and political repression?  Again, no one here is defending the US.  It's just that some of us are able to evaluate Castro on his merits.  Are some of his actions very understandable due to the pressures and treatment of the US?  Certainly.  But this does not excuse his treatment of political dissidents.

Except the problem here is according to many the executions didn't stop after the revolution with Castro stabilizing his power.  And the forced labor camps and torture inarguably did not either.  And casting the people who fled to Florida as those that simply "wanted to leave" is what is propaganda.*  They fled out of fear of persecution, and many had nothing to do with the Batista regime but rather had the temerity to criticize the Castro regime.  The vast majority of them did not "want to leave" their families, homes, and country.

 

*BTW, I see I did leave out exile one time when I was referring to the "substantial portion of the population."  I sincerely apologize, but this is what I meant, as was stated in my first response, e.g. "large group of Cubans Castro killed, tortured, and exiled."

Lol, no, Cubans in exile in Florida don't count when it comes to grieving Castro. They left. They were not Castro supporters. The fact they don't grieve for him doesn't count. 

You'd better check your history. The US eventually put an embargo on Cuba and withdrew it's ambassador, weakening support for Batista. Batista then nationalized US oil companies and other properties, while continuing to support the Mafia and other US businesses. And 75% of the land in Cuba was owned by foreigners, mainly planted in sugar cane, the money going overseas and the people being left without farmland to grow food. Castro's own family lands were expropriated along with the rest of the lands taken over and collectivized by the government. Donald Trump bitched about Obama "selling the US embassy in London for nothing".  Stupid ass doesn't mention it was a building on land owned by the Duke of Westminster, who reportedly said the US could keep the place in exchange for his family's lands in Virginia expropriated by the US government in 1776. What do you think happens after a revolution?

Duh, every person who writes about the Cuban revolution pulls unreliable numbers out of a hat. Because capitalists don't have an agenda, huh? Amnesty International numbers end in 1987 because they were there until 1987, and I trust their research more than American government backed Cubans in exile painting Castro as a bloodthirsty guy slaughtering Cubans. Did you not read that Batista soldiers were allowed to go home, not sent to forced labour camps the way the Russians sent prisoners to the gulag, officers went into exile, they weren't executed the way the Russians would have done. People who did not support Castro left in droves, they weren't banished or exiled. They left. They could have stayed and built their country.

And yes, the executions basically stopped fairly quickly. Executions make the news, since they are so rare, unlike in the US. The most high profile executions were of three army officers decades ago, because apparently they got into drug smuggling. The last execution in Cuba happened in April, 2003. Last year alone 23 people were executed in the US.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

The problem with dmc isn't that he listed 'facts'.  It's that he claimed that Trudeau was wrong in making a statement about Castro upon his death.  Dmc is coming from a place of American propaganda where Castro is to be looked upon as scum, and that's it.  As a special case of evil. 

Yeah, never said Castro was scum, nor a special case of evil, but enjoy your amusingly pathetic interpretation.  And my problem with Trudeau's statements, once again, was simply this:

On 1/16/2018 at 6:21 PM, dmc515 said:

So, when Trudeau says "both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for ‘el Comandante," it is an incredibly naive statement.  It also is a slap in the face to the large group of Cubans Castro killed, tortured, or exiled.  Further, it suggests a naivete that will be seized upon by oppressive regimes throughout the world - in a similar fashion to how Putin is brazenly gaming Trump.  In short, it makes Trudeau look like one of those dumb hipsters wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt that I laugh at on the street.

Compare that statement of Trudeau's to Obama's:

Quote

President Barack Obama said “history will record and judge” former Cuban leader Fidel Castro’s impact on the island nation and offered a “hand of friendship” to the Cuban people in a statement Saturday on Castro’s death at 90 years old.

“We know that this moment fills Cubans — in Cuba and in the United States — with powerful emotions, recalling the countless ways in which Fidel Castro altered the course of individual lives, families and of the Cuban nation,” he said. [...]

“As they do, the Cuban people must know that they have a friend and partner in the United States of America,” Obama concluded.

Or Angela Merkel's spokesperson, who stated the Cuban revolution was linked with "putting the island and the inhabitants of the island under a system of political repression for decades.  Or, from the same link, Trudeau's own comments after he backtracked from his initial statement, in which he acknowledged there were "significant concerns" about Cuba's human rights record.  Seems like lots of people knew it was ill-advised to cast Castro as a purely a beloved figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

 

No, the Castro regime is certainly not a special case of evil.  But pointing out their atrocities and why it's naive to willfully ignore such while painting Castro as a beloved hero apparently means you're a McCarthyist propagandist, even though I don't think I've mentioned communism once until now (and that's because Castro's actions have nothing to do with communism).

Oh bull. I posted a story about the fact the Canadian government will not give grants to groups for summer jobs unless they acknowledge their core mission does not violate Human Rights in Canada, and Fox was stirring up shit among the evangelical community over evangelicals that refuse to give women the right to control their bodies. You countered with "Got no problem with this, but Trudeau's comments on Castro aren't going away.  They were ill advised, amateurish, and something no relevant party in this hemisphere will forget anytime soon. "

What relevant party in this hemisphere is that? Cubans will always remember Canada as a great friend. The US? Yes, the US has a fucked up attitude towards Cuba. Obama's opening up of the relationship happened because Canada worked as a go between and offered our country as a place for talks.

Trudeau's comments were not ill-advised, because Cuba is a friend. We haven't given a shit about how pissed the US is about that for decades and we don't give a shit now. Well, except for the Republicans Lite in Canada, the Conservatives. Nobody in Canada has forgotten that there were lousy things that happened and still happen in Cuba, but shit, we to a fuck-ton of business with China and they are way worse. Anyone who thinks people don't know about Cuba is the party that's naïve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Yeah, never said Castro was scum, nor a special case of evil, but enjoy your amusingly pathetic interpretation.  And my problem with Trudeau's statements, once again, was simply this:

Compare that statement of Trudeau's to Obama's:

Or Angela Merkel's spokesperson, who stated the Cuban revolution was linked with "putting the island and the inhabitants of the island under a system of political repression for decades.  Or, from the same link, Trudeau's own comments after he backtracked from his initial statement, in which he acknowledged there were "significant concerns" about Cuba's human rights record.  Seems like lots of people knew it was ill-advised to cast Castro as a purely a beloved figure.

You really are a joke. Obama is an American politician.  I'm not sure why you think it's significant that his public comments about Castro followed the typical American position.  I am not familiar with Germany's relationship with Cuba, but I assume the politics of it are such that their leader is required to make some color-by-number commentary about Castro being bad.  

For the rest, Fragile Bid has said it way better than I could.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Lol, no, Cubans in exile in Florida don't count when it comes to grieving Castro. They left. They were not Castro supporters. The fact they don't grieve for him doesn't count.

My point is that you're suggesting they and their families don't count when Trudeau refers to the Cuban people's "deep and lasting affection for 'El Comandante.'"  

18 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

You'd better check your history.

From Granma, the official paper of the Cuban Communist Party:

Quote

As an aggressive move against the Cuban people in 1960, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s administration reduced Cuba’s sugar quota – the market share allotted to Cuba. (Seewww.granma.cu/cuba/2015-07-06/sin-cuota-pero-sin-amo - Spanish). Congress awarded the President the authority to make such a decision, allowing him to use regulatory mechanisms for the purpose of coercion and reprisals against the Cuban Revolution.

At the time, Fidel made clear that the action was intended to “undermine our country’s economy, defeat us with hunger, and subjugate our people.”

Just as had been warned, in accordance with decisions made by the U.S., the Revolutionary Government’s Council of Ministers approved the Nationalization Law, which, in its first article authorized the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister “to order jointly, through resolutions, when they consider appropriate for the defense of national interest, the nationalization via obligatory expropriation of property and companies owned by individuals or incorporated entities of the United States of America, and companies with interests or participation of such persons, regardless of their constitution in accordance with Cuban laws.” [1]

Cuba nationalized oil refineries in October 1960 as a response to Ike canceling the sugar imports, which led to the beginnings of formalizing the embargo, which led to the Cuban government seizing American property, which led to Ike cutting off all diplomatic relations in 1961.  More importantly, the Castro regime began purchasing arms from the Soviets during the Spring of 1960.  Anyway, I've forgotten why any of this matters.

33 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Duh, every person who writes about the Cuban revolution pulls unreliable numbers out of a hat. Because capitalists don't have an agenda, huh? Amnesty International numbers end in 1987 because they were there until 1987, and I trust their research more than American government backed Cubans in exile painting Castro as a bloodthirsty guy slaughtering Cubans.

[...]

And yes, the executions basically stopped fairly quickly. Executions make the news, since they are so rare, unlike in the US. The most high profile executions were of three army officers decades ago, because apparently they got into drug smuggling. The last execution in Cuba happened in April, 2003. Last year alone 23 people were executed in the US.

So those academic sources are all based on a capitalist agenda and American propaganda?  Alright, there's no point in continuing discussion.

39 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

People who did not support Castro left in droves, they weren't banished or exiled. They left. They could have stayed and built their country.

LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now