Facts and Myths about the Cuba embargo

luiz

Trendy Revolutionary
Joined
Nov 19, 2001
Messages
20,544
Whenever anyone points the notorious fact that Cuba, the socialist model, is a starving hellhole, some commie says that it's all due to the american embargo against the island. Cuba would be just like Switzerland, they say, if it was not for the bloody yankee' embargo.

But let's analyze the facts:

1-The Embargo only prevents american people and business from cunducing business with Cuba. All other nations of the world can and do trade with Castro's regime. Among the many cuban trading partners, I can point out to Spain, Russia, Mexico, Canada, China and Brazil. And there are many others.

2-When the revolution took place, Castro nationalised ALL american property in the island. What did he expect? That the US would continue to do business with him? That the americans would pretend that nothing happened?

3- In 1974, following the rapprochement between the United States and China, the U.S. also sought engagement with Castro. Unilaterally, President Gerald Ford decreed a partial lifting of the embargo, allowing U.S. business established in other countries or their subsidiaries, to engage in commercial transactions with Cuba. This goodwill gesture on the part of the United States remained unanswered by Cuba, despite the fact that trade between Cuba and American business reached $704 million in 1989. In contrast, Castro's behavior became increasingly aggressive as opposed to conciliatory. For example, he sent Cuban troops to join the Armed conflicts in Angola and Ethiopia, and was involved in conflicts in the Middle East (Golan Heights) as well as Indochina.

4- Is the economic embargo responsible for the scarcity of food and medicine in Cuba? Absolutely not. Despite the U.S. embargo, Cuba can and does trade with the rest of the world. Any medicine or food that Cuba wishes to acquire can be obtained in Mexico, Canada or Panama, to mention only a few countries in geographic proximity with Cuba. In fact, acquiring medicines in Canada or Mexico is less expensive than buying them in the U.S. The medicines produced in the United States are on average 25% less expensive in those countries. In addition, the Cuban people lack even medicines that are produced in Cuba, such as aspirin, and antibiotics, because Castro exports them to countries like Nicaragua and Ecuador, thereby depriving the Cuban people. It is the same with food. To blame the embargo for the lack of food in Cuba is ridiculous. Food staples such as vegetables, pork, chicken and eggs that were in natural abundance in Cuba have declined markedly in Fidel Castro' centralized economy. His failed economic policies have ruined a previously prosperous nation. Farmers were stripped of land that now lies vacant and abandoned. The Minister of Agriculture himself recognized that 25% of the land is overrun with weeds. Farmers are not allowed to cultivate that land. To blame the United States and the embargo for shortages in Cuba is nothing more than a myth that has been propagated to hoodwink those who are not familiar with Cuba' reality.

5-Cuba's budget assigns an average of $4 million annually for importing medicines. In contrast, the European Union donates to Cuba approximately $10 million in food and medicine each year and the United States, the embargo notwithstanding, has donated nearly $472 millions in medicine to Cuba in the last ten years. With this quantities in donations, Cuban would have more than enough to satisfy internal demand. But, where are those medicines? They can be found in hospitals for the exclusive use of foreigners who pay for medical services in Cuba in dollars, and in hospitals reserved for the political elite of the country (when the average Cuban is prohibited from seeking medical care). Those exclusive hospitals and clinics do not suffer from medicine shortages. Medicines can also be found in stores that accept only dollars. The thruth is that the Cuban people do not have access to that food and medicine because of Fidel Castro' discriminatory policies.

Q:Why does the US trade with the communist dictatorship of China, but not with the the communist dictatorship of Cuba?
A:China never nationalized(stole) american property.

Q:So it's all about money then?
A: Yes, the embargo is much more about money then principles. But that doesn't make it any less legitmate. When you nationalize(steal) all property from a country inside your nation, you must expect some consequences. Why should the US trade with Cuba, having no guarantee whatsoever that Cuba shall respect american property?
 
Of course, that's only looking one way. Cuba also lost the enormus US market for its cigars, sugarcane, etc.
 
Luiz, heres another misguided myth for you: Anyone who feels the embargo is unjust is a Commie and thinks Cuba would be like Switzerland without it.
 
North King said:
Of course, that's only looking one way. Cuba also lost the enormus US market for its cigars, sugarcane, etc.

not really; I'd bet its insanlly simple to get cuban products into the US via Mexico...

*edit*; but that in turn would jack up the price, meaning that the greates tpotential buyer for *unofficial* cuban products is turned off by the relitivlly higher price that would have to be paid it also explains why cuban cigars are so damned expensive here, but a fiar deal cheaper in Britain
 
North King said:
Of course, that's only looking one way. Cuba also lost the enormus US market for its cigars, sugarcane, etc.

If they wanted to keep the american market, then why nationalise ALL american property?

How can they honestly expect no reaction? How can they expect trade without giving a guarantee of respect of property?
 
Dumb pothead said:
Luiz, heres another misguided myth for you: Anyone who feels the embargo is unjust is a Commie and thinks Cuba would be like Switzerland without it.


Touche. I still believe that the embargo is unjust, as the USA had pretty much control of the whole of Cuba, plus the government, from their banana plantatrions etc. The USA had had a substancial presence in Cuba since around 1890, so it'sa natural for a country to want a sense of independence.
 
I have been there 2 years ago and living conditions weren't that bad. Life expectancy is high and child mortality very low. People have just enough to eat(food is available only for vouchers) which keeps them healthy. Cuba is a sunny place with nice beaches. Definitely not the worst place to be on this planet.

EDIT: The embargo hurts financially. It keeps US business and people out of the country.
 
nonconformist said:
Touche. I still believe that the embargo is unjust, as the USA had pretty much control of the whole of Cuba, plus the government, from their banana plantatrions etc. The USA had had a substancial presence in Cuba since around 1890, so it'sa natural for a country to want a sense of independence.

I'll repeat myself:

luiz said:
If they wanted to keep the american market, then why nationalise ALL american property?

How can they honestly expect no reaction? How can they expect trade without giving a guarantee of respect of property?
 
1.I'm not entirely sure of the figures, but I think almost all of Cuba's pre-embargo trade was with the US, so the damage done to Cuba by the embargo is very real.

2.Of course he nationalised it. He was a communist- it's what communists do :rolleyes: The whole goddam point in communism is that corporations and private property don't exist. If he allowed corporations to own private property, he wouldn't be a communist would he?

3.Would these causes Castro sent troops to be communist, by any chance?

4.Cuba may not have imported the medicines from the US, but much of the money needed to buy them would have come from there pre-embargo.

5.Cuba is a poor country, they need money. The government gets this money by only giving medicine to those who pay for it. They do that in America too, I believe.
 
nonconformist said:
Touche. I still believe that the embargo is unjust, as the USA had pretty much control of the whole of Cuba, plus the government, from their banana plantatrions etc. The USA had had a substancial presence in Cuba since around 1890, so it'sa natural for a country to want a sense of independence.
Imperialists will forgive almost anything, but they draw the line at weak, third world countries controlling their own resources.
 
luiz said:
I'll repeat myself:

And I'll repeat myself:

The USA had had a substancial presence in Cuba since around 1890, so it'sa natural for a country to want a sense of independence.
 
luiz said:
If they wanted to keep the american market, then why nationalise ALL american property?

How can they honestly expect no reaction? How can they expect trade without giving a guarantee of respect of property?
Because the US owned half the country, and what is the point of Communism when half your land is owned by CAPITALISTS!
Communists don't like private property- why can't you understand?
 
~Corsair#01~ said:
Because the US owned half the country, and what is the point of Communism when half your land is owned by CAPITALISTS!
Communists don't like private property- why can't you understand?

Okay, and Capitalists don't like getting their property nationalized -- why can't you understand?
 
~Corsair#01~ said:
1.I'm not entirely sure of the figures, but I think almost all of Cuba's pre-embargo trade was with the US, so the damage done to Cuba by the embargo is very real.

2.Of course he nationalised it. He was a communist- it's what communists do :rolleyes: The whole goddam point in communism is that corporations and private property don't exist. If he allowed corporations to own private property, he wouldn't be a communist would he?

3.Would these causes Castro sent troops to be communist, by any chance?

4.Cuba may not have imported the medicines from the US, but much of the money needed to buy them would have come from there pre-embargo.

5.Cuba is a poor country, they need money. The government gets this money by only giving medicine to those who pay for it. They do that in America too, I believe.



I agree with most of what you said. Nationalizing U.S. companies is an automatic. A Communist government power stems from the fact that it has control of everything:the land, the businesses, the farms, et cetera.

As to number 3, Angola and Ethiopia were both involved in civil wars (following revolutions), both of which had Marxist parties vying for power. Cuba was merely helping spread the ideology that it believed in by helping the Marxist parties. Obviously, the U.S. wouldn't want this, but what do you expect Cuba to do? Fund the capitalist side? That's like asking the U.S. to help Communist groups overthrow a foreign government.

Cuba actually has a very high life expectancy and low child mortality rate as well as a 96% literate population. It's definitely not a paradise, but it's not as bad as you make it out to be.
 
Compared to Haiti, supposedly a democratic country, Cuba IS a paradise.
 
Perhaps Castro made a mistake when he ordered the seizure of private properties because he did not have a rounded understanding of American politics and the backlash Cuba would face.

The embargo was not a punishment for naughty behaviour. The relations between state governments is barely analogous to relationships between individuals. The economic sanctions were meant to make an example of Cuba, and more importantly, to put added pressure on Castro's regime in the hopes that it would be overthrown.
 
Allow me to explain, in simple terms:
THE WHOLE POINT OF COMMUNISM IS THAT PRIVATE PROPERTY DOES NOT EXIST
So, when the communists came to power, they could:
[A]- Abandon communism totally.
or - Confiscate all private property.
Being communists, they picked B.
 
nonconformist said:
The USA had had a substancial presence in Cuba since around 1890, so it'sa natural for a country to want a sense of independence.

I agree, but with each action expect a reaction. You get independence, you lose your trade partner. To expect a "Capitalists" country to support a "Communist" I believe is asking to much as well. Both go along different paths. Cuba picked their road and either must live it or decide on another path. Being from a "Capitlists" country, I see no reason to support the road Cuba is on. As for the other countries of the world, they must decide for theirselfs.
 
Xiahou-Dun said:
I agree, but with each action expect a reaction. You get independence, you lose your trade partner. To expect a "Capitalists" country to support a "Communist" I believe is asking to much as well. Both go along different paths. Cuba picked their road and either must live it or decide on another path. Being from a "Capitlists" country, I see no reason to support the road Cuba is on. As for the other countries of the world, they must decide for theirselfs.
Just because they're on a different "road", doesn't mean there is any reason whatsoever why not to trade with them.
Nazi Germany was on a different "road", they had no problem trading with them. :rolleyes:
As for independence, the US gave independence to Cuba of their own free will, and just because they're independent doesn't mean anything whatsoever.
The US isn't a part of Britain anymore, yet we still trade with you.
 
Seeing who initiated this thread I have absolutely no wish to get involved in any further debates, however adults are free to continue this subject by the help of PMs.
Here are some helpful links concerning this subiect: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=99591
http://www.zmag.org/LAM/zcuba.html, for specially interested I can probably dig up more.
Finally try to imagine what other Latin-American countries would be like following a similar course as Cuba...
 
Back
Top Bottom