Cuba receives first US shipment since 1962, under special permit from US government - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Scrimp;36767549]Was it childish when America parked missiles in turkey but cried like a baby when Soviet Union parked missiles in Cuba?[/QUOTE] Not what happened.

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36771821]Not what happened.[/QUOTE] That's exactly what happened. The US's response was quite disproportional, probably because, unlike the USSR, it never had enemies on its doorstep. It's funny how the whole crisis is construed as a victory in propaganda where we 'subdued' the USSR. Or how there's a double standard between the american quarantine of cuba and soviet blockade of berlin.

[QUOTE=Aide;36767005]I view Cuba and a precious fruit. I would love to travel their as a vacation. Especially compared to what's going on in Mexico right now. Alas US still has "beef" with Cuba. At least Obama has started a path of reforms so one day I can without going threw another country.[/QUOTE] I can't even read this. Can someone decipher this for me?

[QUOTE=TheTalon;36771542][B]Socialism isn't even bad. Hell a Mix between that and capitalism would probably be the best thing to happen to a country[/B] Maybe in 20 years, we'll be able to go to Cuba for vacation, because it has some awesome beaches, and water to dive in[/QUOTE] You know that 100% of "capitalist" nations already are socialist plus capitalist, right? A nation that was completely capitalist wouldn't have a government that monitors and regulates the economy.

The US has been giving money for years to Cuba. They just haven't been cashing it in.

[QUOTE=Conscript;36772388]That's exactly what happened. The US's response was quite disproportional, probably because, unlike the USSR, it never had enemies on its doorstep. It's funny how the whole crisis is construed as a victory in propaganda where we 'subdued' the USSR. Or how there's a double standard between the american quarantine of cuba and soviet blockade of berlin.[/QUOTE] After further review, I have realized that what Scrimp said is exactly what happened. I thought the U.S. had put anti-missile systems in Turkey. But nope, they put nukes there.

[QUOTE=Aide;36767005]I view Cuba and a precious fruit. I would love to travel their as a vacation. Especially compared to what's going on in Mexico right now. Alas US still has "beef" with Cuba. At least Obama has started a path of reforms so one day I can without going threw another country.[/QUOTE] Which country did you plan to throw?

[QUOTE=Brickhead;36768223]we r all human bengs and are shud put ower diffrences aside and haved embargos gone[/QUOTE] I like these guys. They're the greatest hivemind system of bots to ever grace our forums. Can we keep them? Please Garry? They're so cute! :3

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36775745]After further review, I have realized that what Scrimp said is exactly what happened. I thought the U.S. had put anti-missile systems in Turkey. But nope, they put nukes there.[/QUOTE] And that's why the crisis is viewed as a victory in propaganda. The United States ended up dismantling their nukes out of Turkey in an agreement with the Soviets. That part of the deal, however, was kept under wraps and the Soviets ended up looking like fools for backing down.

[QUOTE=Conscript;36772388]That's exactly what happened. The US's response was quite disproportional, probably because, unlike the USSR, it never had enemies on its doorstep. It's funny how the whole crisis is construed as a victory in propaganda where we 'subdued' the USSR. Or how there's a double standard between the american quarantine of cuba and soviet blockade of berlin.[/QUOTE] You can't even really draw a parallel between the Cuban embargo and the berlin blockade. The berlin blockade was preventing the west from getting important supplies like food to people who couldn't get it any other way since their country was in ruins.

[QUOTE=Carne;36768907]I've heard Cuba is a great place to visit. Would love to travel there one day.[/QUOTE] It's fucking lovely and the people are really friendly as long as you arent american. Loads of Canadian tourists for some reason. I recommend it

[QUOTE=Conscript;36772388] Or how there's a double standard between the american quarantine of cuba and soviet blockade of berlin.[/QUOTE] Except they're not the same. The American quarantine of Cuba only prevents Americans from trading with Cuba; they do not prevent other international trade with Cuba. Meanwhile, the Soviet blockade of Berlin prevented all land-based non-Soviet access to non-Soviet Berlin, including the supply of food, with the aim of establishing de facto Soviet control over all of Berlin; humanitarian crisis was prevented by the Airlift. The only way your comparison would be valid would be if the US currently had a total naval blockade around Cuba preventing all non-American trade, with the aim of forcing Cuban economic and humanitarian dependency on the US. This isn't happening.

[QUOTE=mysteryman;36768450] I remember watching a documentary where someone was able to tour and film cuba. I remember thinking how beautiful the country was, even in Havana, and how i'd absolutely love to visit such a place.[/QUOTE] Cuba is as open to tourism as any other country, I've been to Havana myself. It's just the Americans who get shafted by their own government.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;36771542]Socialism isn't even bad. Hell a Mix between that and capitalism would probably be the best thing to happen to a country Maybe in 20 years, we'll be able to go to Cuba for vacation, because it has some awesome beaches, and water to dive in[/QUOTE] Why not simply achieve true socialism?

[QUOTE=znk666;36782996]Why not simply achieve true socialism?[/QUOTE] Unfeasible with higher populations.

First, quarantine =/= embargo The quarantine did cut cuba off from the world, this was done during the missile crisis and not after. The embargo does basically forbid non-american trade, because the helms-burton act forces traders to pick either cuba or america, pigeonholing cuba in with a few 'rogue states' and whoever isn't on good terms with the US. The soviet blockade of berlin was, to my knowledge, done after the US forbid west germany from paying any reparations to the USSR and marshall plan declared you must liberalize the economy to receive aid, forcing the USSR to take from satellite states and take drastic action. The USSR did not want to 'take over' west berlin, on the contrary, the USSR wanted germany to be a unified, neutral state like finland and austria. The US wouldn't allow this, so the sabre rattling began.

[QUOTE=znk666;36782996]Why not simply achieve true socialism?[/QUOTE] I think social democracy is a better way of doing it.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;36784632]I think social democracy is a better way of doing it.[/QUOTE] Except that's trying to put a human face on capitalism,which is inherently ineffective and useless. [editline]15th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Ardosos;36783685]Unfeasible with higher populations.[/QUOTE] No,that would be communism not socialism.

[QUOTE=znk666;36784677]Except that's trying to put a human face on capitalism,which is inherently ineffective and useless. [/QUOTE] No it isn't it's perfectly effective and is used in most developed European countries to some extent, making essential serviced publicly owned while having non essentials run privately, I see no problem with that.

[QUOTE=znk666;36784677] No,that would be communism not socialism.[/QUOTE] I would imagine that all forms of economy would break apart when the population is too high.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;36784725]No it isn't it's perfectly effective and is used in most developed European countries to some extent, making essential serviced publicly owned while having non essentials run privately, I see no problem with that.[/QUOTE] It really depends on your view of which are essential,though i don't see why you oppose social ownership.

[QUOTE=Conscript;36784011] The soviet blockade of berlin was, to my knowledge, done after the US forbid west germany from paying any reparations to the USSR and marshall plan declared you must liberalize the economy to receive aid, forcing the USSR to take from satellite states and take drastic action. The USSR did not want to 'take over' west berlin, on the contrary, the USSR wanted germany to be a unified, neutral state like finland and austria. The US wouldn't allow this, so the sabre rattling began.[/QUOTE] Your knowledge is totally off, they wanted to set up a neutral (communist/soviet puppet) state. [quote=Wikipedia]The Berlin Blockade (24 June 1948 – 12 May 1949) was one of the first major international crises of the Cold War. During the multinational occupation of post–World War II Germany, the Soviet Union blocked the Western Allies' railway, road and canal access to the sectors of Berlin under Allied control. Their aim was to force the western powers to allow the Soviet zone to start supplying Berlin with food and fuel, thereby giving the Soviets practical control over the entire city.[/quote] I've looked over and over for the USSR wanting Germany to be neutral, and have found nothing.

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;36775513]You know that 100% of "capitalist" nations already are socialist plus capitalist, right? A nation that was completely capitalist wouldn't have a government that monitors and regulates the economy.[/QUOTE] I want more socialism, though. Money funnels too much

[QUOTE=znk666;36785267]It really depends on your view of which are essential,though i don't see why you oppose social ownership.[/QUOTE] I don't oppose social ownership as a whole, I feel things like healthcare, police that kind of stuff should be publicly run, benefits should also be given to those who need them, however in many industries, public ownership would simply stifle innovation.

[quote]I've looked over and over for the USSR wanting Germany to be neutral, and have found nothing. [/quote] Look up the 'stalin notes'.

[QUOTE=Conscript;36784011]First, quarantine =/= embargo The quarantine did cut cuba off from the world, this was done during the missile crisis and not after. The embargo does basically forbid non-american trade, because the helms-burton act forces traders to pick either cuba or america, pigeonholing cuba in with a few 'rogue states' and whoever isn't on good terms with the US. The soviet blockade of berlin was, to my knowledge, done after the US forbid west germany from paying any reparations to the USSR and marshall plan declared you must liberalize the economy to receive aid, forcing the USSR to take from satellite states and take drastic action. The USSR did not want to 'take over' west berlin, on the contrary, the USSR wanted germany to be a unified, neutral state like finland and austria. The US wouldn't allow this, so the sabre rattling began.[/QUOTE] Actually, the intent was different. The US weren't interested in taking over Cuba, they were just against the Castro regime which had seized all American-owned property and allied with the Soviets. With regards to effect, there's a substantial difference between forcing a choice in trade, and physically blockading the country to prevent unauthorised trade. In contrast, the Soviet Blockade was actually a power grab, pure and simple. The idea was to force all of Berlin to be dependent upon Soviet supplies, ultimately leading to the West's withdrawal from Berlin and Soviet control. I saw your reference to the Stalin note. Putting aside the fact that many West Germans saw it as merely a ruse, EVEN IF it was sincere, it's actually irrelevant - it was proposed AFTER the Blockade. With regards to the Marshall Plan, the offer WAS extended to the Soviet Union and its satellite states, only to have the Soviets reject it (presumably because of economic liberalisation requirements) and forbid its satellite states from taking part, ultimately leading to violence - but I can't see how that justifies the Berlin Blockade, other than giving basis to Soviet-West hostility. Secondly, I can't see how your point of reparations is substantive - was East Germany paying reparations to the West? Wasn't the seizure of Berlin reparations in itself? How does that "force the USSR to take drastic action"?

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;36775123][quote] I view Cuba and a precious fruit. I would love to travel their as a vacation. Especially compared to what's going on in Mexico right now. Alas US still has "beef" with Cuba. At least Obama has started a path of reforms so one day I can without going threw another country.[/quote] I can't even read this. Can someone decipher this for me?[/QUOTE] "I view Cuba as a precious fruit. I would love to vacation there, especially when considering what is going on in Mexico right now. Alas, the US still has "beef" with Cuba. Atleast Obama has started on the path of reforms, so that one day I can go to Cuba without stopping in a different country."