Scuba-en Cuba Camper, diving tour Cuba

"Tony Johnson" <tony.nospam@old-forge.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4276580a$0$46348$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
> Lee Bell wrote:
>> Let us keep in mind that the Castro government is the publicly announced
>> enemy of the United States and that once, there was a blockade, while
>> Russian missiles in Cuba were aimed at my homeland.
>
> Let us also keep in mind the unprovoked invasion of Cuba by your country
> that led to that situation.

1. There was no unprovoked attack on Cuba by my country. There was an
attack by Cubans that wanted their country
back that my country supported. Unfortunately, it didn't work very
well.

2. They were Soviet missiles, complete with Soviet crews. We didn't attack
Russia, unprovoked or otherwise.

Lee

"Tony Johnson" <tony.nospam@old-forge.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4276580a$0$46348$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
> Lee Bell wrote:
>> Let us keep in mind that the Castro government is the publicly announced
>> enemy of the United States and that once, there was a blockade, while
>> Russian missiles in Cuba were aimed at my homeland.
>
> Let us also keep in mind the unprovoked invasion of Cuba by your country
> that led to that situation.

1. There was no unprovoked attack on Cuba by my country. There was an
attack by Cubans that wanted their country
back that my country supported. Unfortunately, it didn't work very
well.

2. They were Soviet missiles, complete with Soviet crews. We didn't attack
Russia, unprovoked or otherwise.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Jason" wrote

>>> It is, however, true that the Helms-Burton law was an attempt to stop
>>> foreign companies from operating completely legally in Cuba.
>>
>> You can't blame a government for trying to make it's preferences work,
>> but
>> there's a big difference between using US influence to try to isolate
>> Cuba
>
> Trying to impose your national laws on the rest of the world is not
> using influence. And the main countries it's aimed at are supposed to be
> the US's allies.

You mean like England and Ireland?

> The embargo is hardly a stunning success, is it?

It certainly isn't. The original point, however, was that it is an embargo
and not a blockade. We've now come full circle.

Lee

"Peter2" wrote

> "Lee Bell" wrote
>> Let us also keep in mind that the US and, in particular, my part of the
>> US is home to several million refugees from Cuba, people we accepted when
>> they were forced to leave their own country. We accepted so many that
>> the cities and county I grew up in are all more than 50% hispanic and
>> that there are substantial portions of my state where I can not
>> communicate because nobody there speaks my language.

> So the US imposes sanctions designed to make Cuba poor (a policy you
> apparently support), and then you complain when surprise surprise you get
> a refugee problem from Cuba.

The US imposed sanctions designed to deny Castro's government access to hard
currency. The sanctions were imposed after the bulk of the refugees arrive
here. The first refugees were those that, in Cuba, were rich. It's not the
refugees I'm complaining about, at least not in this thread, it's the
government that forced them to flee from their own country, often with
complete loss of all assets and with extreme risk of loss of life. It is
the Cuban population of the US that is the primary force behind the
continued embargo of the country. I suspect that they have good reason.

By the way, the US embargo specifically allows humanitarian, educational and
religious travel and funding for Cuban citizens. Cubans from the United
States are allowed to send limited amounts of money and goods to their
relatives in Cuba and are allowed to travel, once or twice I year I think,
to visit relatives in Cuba. It's not an embargo against the Cuban people.
It is an embargo against the Castro government.

Lee

"Peter2" wrote

> "Lee Bell" wrote
>> Let us also keep in mind that the US and, in particular, my part of the
>> US is home to several million refugees from Cuba, people we accepted when
>> they were forced to leave their own country. We accepted so many that
>> the cities and county I grew up in are all more than 50% hispanic and
>> that there are substantial portions of my state where I can not
>> communicate because nobody there speaks my language.

> So the US imposes sanctions designed to make Cuba poor (a policy you
> apparently support), and then you complain when surprise surprise you get
> a refugee problem from Cuba.

The US imposed sanctions designed to deny Castro's government access to hard
currency. The sanctions were imposed after the bulk of the refugees arrive
here. The first refugees were those that, in Cuba, were rich. It's not the
refugees I'm complaining about, at least not in this thread, it's the
government that forced them to flee from their own country, often with
complete loss of all assets and with extreme risk of loss of life. It is
the Cuban population of the US that is the primary force behind the
continued embargo of the country. I suspect that they have good reason.

By the way, the US embargo specifically allows humanitarian, educational and
religious travel and funding for Cuban citizens. Cubans from the United
States are allowed to send limited amounts of money and goods to their
relatives in Cuba and are allowed to travel, once or twice I year I think,
to visit relatives in Cuba. It's not an embargo against the Cuban people.
It is an embargo against the Castro government.

Lee