Zombie69 said:
Point is, once you've pissed off every other nation sufficiently, you'll end up like Cuba, only worse (at least Cuba had the USSR to back them up).
Zombie69 said:
How is that a bad analogy? It was meant to show that once you get isolated with an embargo, you can get real poor real fast.
Maybe it's a bad analogy if you guys think it's Castro's fault if his people are so poor, and not the USA's. If that's the case, there's nothing i can do to defeat the decades of propaganda you've been subjected to which lead you to believe this.
Your analogy would require America's biggest trading partners to stop trading with it; something which is not even close to happening. America and many of its trading partners are quite interdependent, as one of my previous posts pointed out.
Cuba's plight is caused by one major superpower, whereas your analogy would require many smaller powers to join together (against each of their economic interests) and stop trading with the USA.
The USA is a nation with almost 300 million people blessed with enormous amounts of natural resources, and is the third largest nation in the world. Cuba is a small island nation of 11+ million, with only a few natural resources.
Cuba's GDP per capita is $3300. America's GDP per capita is $41,800. Even with no foreign trade, America's per capita GDP would remain well above $3300.
You said that America would be even worse off than Cuba, because at least Cuba had the USSR to back it. But Cuba no longer has the USSR to back them, and so that statement did not make your analogy any stronger.
Other than that, yeah, your analogy was perfect. The USA will end up exactly like Cuba.
Because your analogy was so perfect, I can see why you sensed so adroitly that I had been brainwashed by propaganda into thinking that the blockade was Castro's fault. Glad you're here to clear all these things up. Sometimes it is best for me to just give up and admit that I'm wrong.