Showing posts with label cuba. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cuba. Show all posts
Thursday, March 24, 2016
Is Obama Leading From Behind?
Reference:
The Obama doctrine: Leading from behind - Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-obama-doctrine-leading-from-behind/2011/04/28/AFBCy18E_story.html
Source of Image: Obama criticized for doing tango 2 days after bombings in Brussels: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-tango-critics-brussels-terror-142641037.html
Labels:
Argentina,
Barack Obama,
Belgium,
Brussels,
cuba,
dancing,
leading from behind,
tango
Thursday, July 2, 2015
Cuba: Obama's Fantasy Land
For more than 50 years, we have embargoed trade and travel with Cuba, and President Obama has stated, "it hasn't worked". What was supposed to have "worked"? Does he really think that a resumption of diplomatic relations with the U.S. will somehow cause Cuba to dump communism and adopt a democratically elected form of a free-trade government?
Cuba has allowed trading (on a very limited basis) and inbound-only travel with the rest of the world, for as long as our embargo has existed. In fact, it has approximately 3 million visitors per year with democracy-loving Canadians representing a third of them. Those visitors are a main revenue maker. Thus, tourism is essential to the strengthening of the Cuban government, its police and security forces, and its military, in order to keep order; especially to keep any dissidents in line with hundreds of arrests and imprisonments each year.
None of that money goes to the people directly because they all work for the government; are paid by the government; and, are housed, fed, and clothed by the government through a system of rationing. All the hotels are government owned and operated. That is why, today, this communist island looks much like it did in the 1960's. So, the injection of American tourist money will just add to their financial strength and not somehow create a showcase of democracy 90 miles off our shores, as President Obama seems to think.
As far as trade with Cuba is concerned, Castro's government, not the people, decide what is allowed into the island and how much. Most Cubans couldn't afford the products that we seem to think they might want. The average Cuban, depending on age and working status, gets between $12 a month for retired persons and $20 for those who work; with an extra $5 for construction workers. That's their allowance. Some might be able to keep tips as hotel and restaurant workers; but most can't. They must pool those tips to be shared among the other workers. They can't have credit cards or take on any debt. Nor can they take money that tourists may give them. Tourist's bills paid with credit cards with tips added, will probably all wind up held by the government.
So, OK, the President has re-opened our embassies. Other country's embassies have existed for decades, and that has never changed them. If Obama thinks that we can use our embassies to undermine the Cuban form of government, he is living a pipe dream. A fantasy. As soon as we are caught trying to do that, they will just shut them down and expel our diplomats. Maybe even arrest our diplomats. Also, any tourists from this country doing the same will be arrested as subversives. Just mark my words.
References:
Obama on US Embassy in Cuba: 'This Is What Change Looks Like': http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/u-s-cuba-relations/coming-obama-announces-deal-open-cuban-embassy-n385001
Cuban Dissidents Arrested Google Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=cuban+dissidents+arrested&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Tourism in Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Cuba
2014: Average salary in Cuba rose 1 pct last year to $20 a month: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2014/06/17/average-salary-in-cuba-rose-1-pct-last-year-to-20-month/
Rationing in Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_Cuba
Cuba has allowed trading (on a very limited basis) and inbound-only travel with the rest of the world, for as long as our embargo has existed. In fact, it has approximately 3 million visitors per year with democracy-loving Canadians representing a third of them. Those visitors are a main revenue maker. Thus, tourism is essential to the strengthening of the Cuban government, its police and security forces, and its military, in order to keep order; especially to keep any dissidents in line with hundreds of arrests and imprisonments each year.
None of that money goes to the people directly because they all work for the government; are paid by the government; and, are housed, fed, and clothed by the government through a system of rationing. All the hotels are government owned and operated. That is why, today, this communist island looks much like it did in the 1960's. So, the injection of American tourist money will just add to their financial strength and not somehow create a showcase of democracy 90 miles off our shores, as President Obama seems to think.
As far as trade with Cuba is concerned, Castro's government, not the people, decide what is allowed into the island and how much. Most Cubans couldn't afford the products that we seem to think they might want. The average Cuban, depending on age and working status, gets between $12 a month for retired persons and $20 for those who work; with an extra $5 for construction workers. That's their allowance. Some might be able to keep tips as hotel and restaurant workers; but most can't. They must pool those tips to be shared among the other workers. They can't have credit cards or take on any debt. Nor can they take money that tourists may give them. Tourist's bills paid with credit cards with tips added, will probably all wind up held by the government.
So, OK, the President has re-opened our embassies. Other country's embassies have existed for decades, and that has never changed them. If Obama thinks that we can use our embassies to undermine the Cuban form of government, he is living a pipe dream. A fantasy. As soon as we are caught trying to do that, they will just shut them down and expel our diplomats. Maybe even arrest our diplomats. Also, any tourists from this country doing the same will be arrested as subversives. Just mark my words.
References:
Obama on US Embassy in Cuba: 'This Is What Change Looks Like': http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/u-s-cuba-relations/coming-obama-announces-deal-open-cuban-embassy-n385001
Cuban Dissidents Arrested Google Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=cuban+dissidents+arrested&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Tourism in Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Cuba
2014: Average salary in Cuba rose 1 pct last year to $20 a month: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2014/06/17/average-salary-in-cuba-rose-1-pct-last-year-to-20-month/
Rationing in Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_Cuba
Labels:
Barack Obama,
cuba,
diplomatic relations,
embargo,
embassy,
tourism,
United States
Friday, May 1, 2015
The Complete Failure of the Obama Doctrine
On the Sunday following President Obama's announced nuke deal with Iran, Thomas Friedman -- liberal op-ed columnist and pseudo intellectual for the New York Times -- sat down with the President to discuss the deal. As part of the interview, Friedman gave props to Obama for "knocking down walls" that have existed for years in the countries of Burma, Cuba, and now, Iran. Friedman called the President's actions towards these countries the "Obama Doctrine" which is to engage rather than isolate adversaries with sanctions. The only problem with this so-called Doctrine is that it is inconsistently applied.
For, example, the President claimed sanctions haven't worked for 60 years in dealing with Cuba. They also haven't deterred Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state. Yet, we still apply sanctions against North Korea, and most recently, Obama applied sanctions against Russia over Crimea and the Ukraine. If sanctions don't work, why apply them to Russia, and why keep them against more than two dozen other countries?
Then, there's the inconsistencies against Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and Crimea. In Libya, we led from behind by forming a coalition to overthrow Gaddafi. And, Gaddafi was overthrown. But, in the case of Syria, we did nothing to help the free-Syria rebels oust the tyrant Bashar al-Assad. Similarly, in the case of Crimea and the Ukraine, we did nothing to assist those who were fighting the Russian-backed rebels.
Also, where there has been engagement, how has that worked?
Engagement with Russia obviously didn't work. In 2009, Obama (vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton) "reset" relations with Russia. We even sweetened the relationship by scraping our European missile defense system that had been seen as a threat to Russia's ability to launch an attack on Europe. So, what did all this "honey" buy us. Nothing. Russia has used our less-aggressive green light to retake Crimea and, eventually, all of the Ukraine. Then, too, Russia has been busy hacking our White House and State Department computers. Things between our two countries haven't been this cold since the war. And, now, Russia is out to protect Iran from any attack over it's nuke program, by installing a sophisticated ground-to-air missile defense system.
In Libya, we and our coalition overthrew Gaddafi, but, since then we've had to high-tail-it out of the country because the people we freed weren't really our friends. Then, in Egypt, Obama backed the Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately, the entire country didn't and the Muslim Brotherhood officials that won elections were ousted by a military coup to protect the nation. It seems like the Obama Doctrine is all about betting on the wrong horse.
Given the past spoiled fruits of the Obama Doctrine, it is hard to believe that our relationship with Cuba and Iran will turn out any better. Already, Cuba is demanding (not asking) for the return of Guantanamo Bay and financial reparations for the last 60 years of sanctions. The "or else" on that demand is anyone's guess. Then, too, besides just recently calling for "Death to America", the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran is demanding immediate removal of all U.N. sanctions or their is no deal. So, now, the Obama Doctrine might be faced with "no engagement" on that one. At the same time, while we are feeding the hand of Iran over a nuke deal, they are busily overthrowing any remnants of the government of Yemen which the President claimed was our best ally against radical Islam.
Essentially, in the wake of the Obama Doctrine, there has been nothing but failure after failure. The fact that the Middle East is on the precipice of an all-out Shia versus Sunni war is an example of how a carrot-only-without-a-stick philosophy is not only wrong but just plain stupid. However, media types on the left like Friedman just can't see it. Simply, the world will not be a better place until Obama and the Obama Doctrine leave the world stage in 2016.
References:
Friedman: Iran and the Obama Doctrine: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/opinion/thomas-friedman-the-obama-doctrine-and-iran-interview.html
Obama Doctrine: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know: http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/obama-foreign-policy-doctrine-iran-nuclear-agreement-deal-change-interview-thomas-friedman-new-york-times-video/
U.S. Sanctions Programs: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/Programs.aspx
How the Russian 'Reset' Explains Obama's Foreign Policy: http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/16/how-the-russian-reset-explains-obamas-foreign-policy/
Obama scraps Bush missile-defense plan - ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-scraps-bush-missile-defense-plan/story?id=8604357
White House hacking reports highlight digital cold war between US, Russia: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/2015/0410/White-House-hacking-reports-highlight-digital-cold-war-between-US-Russia
Russia to supply Iran with missile defence system: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/04/russia-supply-iran-sophisticated-air-defence-system-150413180038692.html
US shuts down Tripoli embassy and evacuates staff in Libya: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-closes-down-embassy-and-evacuates-staff-in-libyas-capital-tripoli-9630561.html
New York Times: Working With the Muslim Brotherhood: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/opinion/roger-cohen-working-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html
Army Ousts Egypt's President; Morsi Is Taken Into Military Custody: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html
Obama Tonight: Yemen and Somalia Are Models of Success: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-tonight-yemen-and-somalia-are-models-success_804728.html
pb
For, example, the President claimed sanctions haven't worked for 60 years in dealing with Cuba. They also haven't deterred Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state. Yet, we still apply sanctions against North Korea, and most recently, Obama applied sanctions against Russia over Crimea and the Ukraine. If sanctions don't work, why apply them to Russia, and why keep them against more than two dozen other countries?
Then, there's the inconsistencies against Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and Crimea. In Libya, we led from behind by forming a coalition to overthrow Gaddafi. And, Gaddafi was overthrown. But, in the case of Syria, we did nothing to help the free-Syria rebels oust the tyrant Bashar al-Assad. Similarly, in the case of Crimea and the Ukraine, we did nothing to assist those who were fighting the Russian-backed rebels.
Also, where there has been engagement, how has that worked?
Engagement with Russia obviously didn't work. In 2009, Obama (vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton) "reset" relations with Russia. We even sweetened the relationship by scraping our European missile defense system that had been seen as a threat to Russia's ability to launch an attack on Europe. So, what did all this "honey" buy us. Nothing. Russia has used our less-aggressive green light to retake Crimea and, eventually, all of the Ukraine. Then, too, Russia has been busy hacking our White House and State Department computers. Things between our two countries haven't been this cold since the war. And, now, Russia is out to protect Iran from any attack over it's nuke program, by installing a sophisticated ground-to-air missile defense system.
In Libya, we and our coalition overthrew Gaddafi, but, since then we've had to high-tail-it out of the country because the people we freed weren't really our friends. Then, in Egypt, Obama backed the Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately, the entire country didn't and the Muslim Brotherhood officials that won elections were ousted by a military coup to protect the nation. It seems like the Obama Doctrine is all about betting on the wrong horse.
Given the past spoiled fruits of the Obama Doctrine, it is hard to believe that our relationship with Cuba and Iran will turn out any better. Already, Cuba is demanding (not asking) for the return of Guantanamo Bay and financial reparations for the last 60 years of sanctions. The "or else" on that demand is anyone's guess. Then, too, besides just recently calling for "Death to America", the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran is demanding immediate removal of all U.N. sanctions or their is no deal. So, now, the Obama Doctrine might be faced with "no engagement" on that one. At the same time, while we are feeding the hand of Iran over a nuke deal, they are busily overthrowing any remnants of the government of Yemen which the President claimed was our best ally against radical Islam.
Essentially, in the wake of the Obama Doctrine, there has been nothing but failure after failure. The fact that the Middle East is on the precipice of an all-out Shia versus Sunni war is an example of how a carrot-only-without-a-stick philosophy is not only wrong but just plain stupid. However, media types on the left like Friedman just can't see it. Simply, the world will not be a better place until Obama and the Obama Doctrine leave the world stage in 2016.
References:
Friedman: Iran and the Obama Doctrine: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/opinion/thomas-friedman-the-obama-doctrine-and-iran-interview.html
Obama Doctrine: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know: http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/obama-foreign-policy-doctrine-iran-nuclear-agreement-deal-change-interview-thomas-friedman-new-york-times-video/
U.S. Sanctions Programs: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/Programs.aspx
How the Russian 'Reset' Explains Obama's Foreign Policy: http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/16/how-the-russian-reset-explains-obamas-foreign-policy/
Obama scraps Bush missile-defense plan - ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-scraps-bush-missile-defense-plan/story?id=8604357
White House hacking reports highlight digital cold war between US, Russia: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/2015/0410/White-House-hacking-reports-highlight-digital-cold-war-between-US-Russia
Russia to supply Iran with missile defence system: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/04/russia-supply-iran-sophisticated-air-defence-system-150413180038692.html
US shuts down Tripoli embassy and evacuates staff in Libya: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-closes-down-embassy-and-evacuates-staff-in-libyas-capital-tripoli-9630561.html
New York Times: Working With the Muslim Brotherhood: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/opinion/roger-cohen-working-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html
Army Ousts Egypt's President; Morsi Is Taken Into Military Custody: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/world/middleeast/egypt.html
Obama Tonight: Yemen and Somalia Are Models of Success: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-tonight-yemen-and-somalia-are-models-success_804728.html
pb
Labels:
Barack Obama,
cuba,
foreign policy,
Iran,
Libya,
middle east,
Obama Doctrine,
russia,
Ukraine
Saturday, December 20, 2014
Think Twice About Any Real Trade With Cuba
Shortly after President Obama announced a normalization of trade relations with Cuba, U.S. businesses began salivating over the fact that they now have a new market for their products. However, this assumes that we will be able to trade with Cuba as if it were a normal partner. Nothing could be further from the truth.
First and most importantly, Cubans are poor as a result of Communism.
Because Cuba is a communist country, the government sets the wages; and because of this, the per capita income is less than $7,000 a year. After buying necessities, there's probably not a lot of room left to spend on expensive imported goods from the U.S. I really can't see the average Cuban buying even the cheapest GM car, the Spark, which sells for almost twice what the average Cuban gets paid in two years. Also, understand that China is a major trading partner with Cuba and, as such, the prices of U.S. products will have to be lower than theirs in order to compete.
Additionally, the Cuban government decides what will be sold to its citizens, and access to any approved goods is rationed. If the government says you can only buy 2 pencils a year, that's all you get. The government also sets the prices of any goods sold there.
For these reasons, Cubans will probably see very few imports from the U.S. At best, the airlines, with flights to and from the island, stand to benefit the most.
On the other side of the coin, Cuba will most likely benefit the most from this deal. They could experience increased exporting of products such as rum and cigars. Although, I'm guessing they already export as much product as they now produce to their existing trading partners like China, Russia, Venezuela and other central and south American countries. For sure, Americans visiting the island should help the tourism business; assuming that the current ban on tourism is lifted and accepted by Raul Castro. Whether or not those visitors will be able to buy anything but a handful of Cuban products while visiting there is questionable since, again, all products are rationed.
Lastly, I don't think American companies will be able to set up businesses in Cuba. Again, because of communism, most business are government owned; with some cooperatives and some self-employment allowed. Not hardly a business model that would be compatible with any form of U.S. business.
References:
U.S. Companies Consider the Possibilities of Cuban Trade: http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-companies-consider-the-possibilities-of-cuban-trade-1418856872
UN Data: Cuba: https://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crName=CUBA
Economy of Cuba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Cuba
First and most importantly, Cubans are poor as a result of Communism.
Because Cuba is a communist country, the government sets the wages; and because of this, the per capita income is less than $7,000 a year. After buying necessities, there's probably not a lot of room left to spend on expensive imported goods from the U.S. I really can't see the average Cuban buying even the cheapest GM car, the Spark, which sells for almost twice what the average Cuban gets paid in two years. Also, understand that China is a major trading partner with Cuba and, as such, the prices of U.S. products will have to be lower than theirs in order to compete.
Additionally, the Cuban government decides what will be sold to its citizens, and access to any approved goods is rationed. If the government says you can only buy 2 pencils a year, that's all you get. The government also sets the prices of any goods sold there.
For these reasons, Cubans will probably see very few imports from the U.S. At best, the airlines, with flights to and from the island, stand to benefit the most.
On the other side of the coin, Cuba will most likely benefit the most from this deal. They could experience increased exporting of products such as rum and cigars. Although, I'm guessing they already export as much product as they now produce to their existing trading partners like China, Russia, Venezuela and other central and south American countries. For sure, Americans visiting the island should help the tourism business; assuming that the current ban on tourism is lifted and accepted by Raul Castro. Whether or not those visitors will be able to buy anything but a handful of Cuban products while visiting there is questionable since, again, all products are rationed.
Lastly, I don't think American companies will be able to set up businesses in Cuba. Again, because of communism, most business are government owned; with some cooperatives and some self-employment allowed. Not hardly a business model that would be compatible with any form of U.S. business.
References:
U.S. Companies Consider the Possibilities of Cuban Trade: http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-companies-consider-the-possibilities-of-cuban-trade-1418856872
UN Data: Cuba: https://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crName=CUBA
Economy of Cuba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Cuba
Thursday, December 18, 2014
The Cuba Deal: Another One of Obama's One-Sided Negotiations
In March 2009, shortly after taking office, President Obama told Iran:
Then there was our "reset" with Russia in 2009 and our one-sided gifts to Putin such as agreeing not to put missile defense systems in Europe. Where did that get us? Relations with Russia are now almost as cold as they were throughout the Cold War.
Also, Obama announced a climate change deal with China in 2014. This, too, was another one-sided effort where we specifically set targets, while China, somewhat, agreed to goals. Goals with holes wide enough to drive a train through. In fact, the Chinese have declared that their carbon emission reduction programs under this agreement will not be subject to any measurable scrutiny. In other words, just believe us when we say we are meeting goals.
So, now, we learn about another one-sided deal. This time with Cuba.
In exchange for one American held in Cuba for 5 years, we gave up 3 highly-valued, convicted Cuban spies. We agreed to open an Embassy in Cuba. We will review dropping the U.S. label of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, and there will be an easing of economic sanctions and a removal of a 54-year embargo on Cuban products such as cigars.
So, what did we get in exchange?
Nothing. No promises of better treatment of the Cuban people. No promise for democracy. No freedom of press or expression. No lifting of travel restrictions on Cubans wanting to visit the U.S. and, no agreement to stop international sponsorship of terrorism. Nothing!
Once again, Present Obama has proven to be a failed negotiator. He can't negotiate with Congress and certainly can't negotiate with our international enemies. Instead, he's more like a game show host who won't just give you what's behind door number three, he'll throw in 1 and 2 as well.
What's really interesting about Cuba is that they have maintained a cozy relationship with both Russia and Iran. The two other countries that Obama showered with gifts and got nothing in return.
One last thing. Obama claims that we need to normalize relations with Cuba because 54 years of isolation hasn't worked. Really? What about nearly 70 years of isolation with North Korea? Are we now expected to normalize relations with them just because the clock ran out? By the way. Cuba is also a close trading partner with North Korea. It is surprising that a President who uses sanctions against Russia now admits sanctions haven't worked against Cuba. They obviously haven't worked against North Korea either. Then, why ever use them?
References:
Obama offers Iran 'new beginning': http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7954211.stm
United States Has Been Secretly Lifting Iranian Sanctions: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/08/very-bad-deal-israeli-pm-netanyahu-lashes-out-over-wests-possible-nuke-deal-with-iran/
Obama Lifts Sanctions, Iranians Win, Regime Loses: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamal-abdi/obama-iran-sanctions_b_3358930.html
Iran nuclear talks extended to 2015 after failure at Vienna: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/24/iran-nuclear-talks-likely-extended-vienna
Obama Administration Caves to Putin on Missile Shield: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-missile-shield-russia/2013/03/17/id/495084/
Obama's One-Sided "Reset" With Russia | RealClearPolitics: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/14/obamas_one-sided_reset_with_russia_118387.html
Obama's Epic Climate Change Deal With China Falls Apart: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/120814-729590-obama-taken-by-chinas-president-xi-jinping-in-signing-phony-climate-deal.htm
Obama hails 'new chapter' in US-Cuba ties: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30516740
Obama: Isolating Cuba hasn't worked: http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/17/politics/obama-cuba-castro-relations/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Cuba–Iran relations - Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba%E2%80%93Iran_relations
Cuba-Russia relations - Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba%E2%80%93Russia_relations
Cuban relations with North Korea - The Economist: http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2013/12/cuban-relations-north-korea
China–Cuba relations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Cuba_relations
"if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fists, they will find an extended hand from us"Despite the fact that Iran has never unclenched its fist by continuing its nuclear weapons program; and, by continuing the development of long range missiles; and by continuing to undermine infant democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan by arming anti-government rebels; we stupidly, and one-sidedly, extended our hand by removing sanctions against them. Even though the removal of such sanctions has produced zero slowdown in their nuclear weapon ambitions.
Then there was our "reset" with Russia in 2009 and our one-sided gifts to Putin such as agreeing not to put missile defense systems in Europe. Where did that get us? Relations with Russia are now almost as cold as they were throughout the Cold War.
Also, Obama announced a climate change deal with China in 2014. This, too, was another one-sided effort where we specifically set targets, while China, somewhat, agreed to goals. Goals with holes wide enough to drive a train through. In fact, the Chinese have declared that their carbon emission reduction programs under this agreement will not be subject to any measurable scrutiny. In other words, just believe us when we say we are meeting goals.
So, now, we learn about another one-sided deal. This time with Cuba.
In exchange for one American held in Cuba for 5 years, we gave up 3 highly-valued, convicted Cuban spies. We agreed to open an Embassy in Cuba. We will review dropping the U.S. label of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, and there will be an easing of economic sanctions and a removal of a 54-year embargo on Cuban products such as cigars.
So, what did we get in exchange?
Nothing. No promises of better treatment of the Cuban people. No promise for democracy. No freedom of press or expression. No lifting of travel restrictions on Cubans wanting to visit the U.S. and, no agreement to stop international sponsorship of terrorism. Nothing!
Once again, Present Obama has proven to be a failed negotiator. He can't negotiate with Congress and certainly can't negotiate with our international enemies. Instead, he's more like a game show host who won't just give you what's behind door number three, he'll throw in 1 and 2 as well.
What's really interesting about Cuba is that they have maintained a cozy relationship with both Russia and Iran. The two other countries that Obama showered with gifts and got nothing in return.
One last thing. Obama claims that we need to normalize relations with Cuba because 54 years of isolation hasn't worked. Really? What about nearly 70 years of isolation with North Korea? Are we now expected to normalize relations with them just because the clock ran out? By the way. Cuba is also a close trading partner with North Korea. It is surprising that a President who uses sanctions against Russia now admits sanctions haven't worked against Cuba. They obviously haven't worked against North Korea either. Then, why ever use them?
References:
Obama offers Iran 'new beginning': http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7954211.stm
United States Has Been Secretly Lifting Iranian Sanctions: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/08/very-bad-deal-israeli-pm-netanyahu-lashes-out-over-wests-possible-nuke-deal-with-iran/
Obama Lifts Sanctions, Iranians Win, Regime Loses: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamal-abdi/obama-iran-sanctions_b_3358930.html
Iran nuclear talks extended to 2015 after failure at Vienna: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/24/iran-nuclear-talks-likely-extended-vienna
Obama Administration Caves to Putin on Missile Shield: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-missile-shield-russia/2013/03/17/id/495084/
Obama's One-Sided "Reset" With Russia | RealClearPolitics: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/14/obamas_one-sided_reset_with_russia_118387.html
Obama's Epic Climate Change Deal With China Falls Apart: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/120814-729590-obama-taken-by-chinas-president-xi-jinping-in-signing-phony-climate-deal.htm
Obama hails 'new chapter' in US-Cuba ties: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30516740
Obama: Isolating Cuba hasn't worked: http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/17/politics/obama-cuba-castro-relations/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Cuba–Iran relations - Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba%E2%80%93Iran_relations
Cuba-Russia relations - Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba%E2%80%93Russia_relations
Cuban relations with North Korea - The Economist: http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2013/12/cuban-relations-north-korea
China–Cuba relations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Cuba_relations
Labels:
Barack Obama,
china,
cuba,
deal,
Iran,
negotiations,
one-side,
russia
Saturday, August 8, 2009
To Hollywood: BYO-TP!
Just a few weeks ago, Hollywood decided to pack their bags and journey to the place where they seem to feel the most at home: Good Ole Commie Cuba (Click to See Full Story). Finally, they have a President that would fulfill their deepest desires and allow them free travel to that mini-version of the former U.S.S.R. Time was running out and all those lefties of Hollywood were getting desperate to see their hero, Fidel, before he was no longer on this earth. Obama was a complete answer to their little marxist prayers.
Cuba is the absolute home of socialism and communism in the Northern Hemisphere of these Americas. No self-respecting Hollywood leftist would be worth his or her salt if they hadn't said they visited Cuba at least once in their lifetimes. It would be sure to be a big hit at all those Hollywood cocktail parties and social events. God knows that any A-lister's trip to Cuba would trump any other small talk at a party about someone's charity work or their so-passe testimony before the Democrats in Congress. For Hollywood, a visit to Cuba is almost as paramount to them as a Muslim having visited Mecca at least once in their lifetime.
Well, I think they'd better pack an extra bag and just completely fill it with toilet paper! Besides the lack of cars, cell phones, electricity, and all the other things that Hollywood can't seem to do without; Cuba now has a toilet paper shortage (Click to See Full Story). Isn't communism/socialism great! You can get all the free health care you want but you can't wipe your own you-know-what!
So, where's Michael Moore now? He never seems to be around when he can't just give complete and glowing praise to his favorite little island in the sun: Fidel's Disneyland of the Caribbean.
Actually, Cuba might not be too happy to see Michael Moore, again. At least until the T.P. shortage is over. That chub would probably run the whole country of Cuba out of T.P. in a single day! In the midst of our public health care debate: Moore seems to think that Cuba is the epitome of health care because it's free! That's because, in Cuba, health care just grows on trees! He even took 9/11 victims to Cuba to get their health care so he could make props of them for another one of his anti-American movies called 'Sicko'. While health care might be free, toilet paper just might warrant a virtual king's ransom.
I guess if the Democrats get their way, America won't just be making a choice between paper and plastic. We'll have to add the choice of either free health care or toilet paper! It will be another one of the "life choices" that we'll all have to make on our path to socialism. One of those sacrifices and tough choices that Obama seemed to have talked about in his campaign.
Cuba is the absolute home of socialism and communism in the Northern Hemisphere of these Americas. No self-respecting Hollywood leftist would be worth his or her salt if they hadn't said they visited Cuba at least once in their lifetimes. It would be sure to be a big hit at all those Hollywood cocktail parties and social events. God knows that any A-lister's trip to Cuba would trump any other small talk at a party about someone's charity work or their so-passe testimony before the Democrats in Congress. For Hollywood, a visit to Cuba is almost as paramount to them as a Muslim having visited Mecca at least once in their lifetime.
Well, I think they'd better pack an extra bag and just completely fill it with toilet paper! Besides the lack of cars, cell phones, electricity, and all the other things that Hollywood can't seem to do without; Cuba now has a toilet paper shortage (Click to See Full Story). Isn't communism/socialism great! You can get all the free health care you want but you can't wipe your own you-know-what!
So, where's Michael Moore now? He never seems to be around when he can't just give complete and glowing praise to his favorite little island in the sun: Fidel's Disneyland of the Caribbean.
Actually, Cuba might not be too happy to see Michael Moore, again. At least until the T.P. shortage is over. That chub would probably run the whole country of Cuba out of T.P. in a single day! In the midst of our public health care debate: Moore seems to think that Cuba is the epitome of health care because it's free! That's because, in Cuba, health care just grows on trees! He even took 9/11 victims to Cuba to get their health care so he could make props of them for another one of his anti-American movies called 'Sicko'. While health care might be free, toilet paper just might warrant a virtual king's ransom.
I guess if the Democrats get their way, America won't just be making a choice between paper and plastic. We'll have to add the choice of either free health care or toilet paper! It will be another one of the "life choices" that we'll all have to make on our path to socialism. One of those sacrifices and tough choices that Obama seemed to have talked about in his campaign.
Labels:
Barack Obama,
cuba,
health care,
heath care reform,
hollywood,
Michael Moore,
toilet paper
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Obama and the Venezuela Example
Right now, for God only knows how many times in this world's history, there is another experiment in socialism taking place in our western hemisphere in the South American country of Venezuela. This Cubanesque conversion of that country from capitalism to socialism and, probably, from democracy to a dictatorial form of communism is being spearheaded by Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez. What concerns me is that much of Chavez' philosophies are being faintly echoed by Barack Obama and other far-left Democrats (Click to see a related commentary from 2005). I think this is especially true when you take this quote from Hugo Chavez, "...the way to build a new and better world is not capitalism. Capitalism leads us straight to hell.” and then you hear words from Mr. Obama about changing the world (See Full Story).
Take, for example, Barack Obama's current stand on taxes. Then, read this CNN News article from April 1999, "Venezuela's Chavez assumes new powers, readies new taxes", and I think you will hear an echo in Barack's pledges of today. Chavez's reference of "leashing the devil" is in regard to the social and economic injustices of capitalism. Barack Obama's multiple comments on "spreading the wealth" sure sound a lot like Chavez's 2005 move to take land away from the wealthy and give it to those who are the lowest on the economic scale (See Full Story). One could argue that Chavez's seizure of lands is much different than just raising taxes on the rich so that money can be redistributed to the poorer in our economy. But, is it really?
When Maxine Waters talked about "socializing (err)...taking over" the oil companies in this video (Click to view) it was obvious that capitalism wasn't on her mind. Maxine is clearly taking a page out of Hugo Chavez's socialist/communist playbook when you read this story from 2007: "Chavez nationalizes oil companies" (click to view news article) .
And, doesn't this sound familiar: "Venezuela nets 4.3 billion US dollars in windfall oil profit tax" (Click to view complete article).
One thing that a leftist form of government can't stand is an opposing viewpoint. In this country, the Democrats are proposing the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" (See Wikipedia Article) to silence the right. In many ways, this is similar to some moves made by Hugo Chavez as seen in this news article: "Chavez to shut down opposition TV" (click to view). Certainly, neither move is intended to have a society with free and uncensored speech.
Chavez has gained more and more control because his left-wing political party has dominant control. Enough control to dramatically change the powers of that country (See Full Story). That control could be very similar to what might occur in this country in 2009 (See Full Story). Besides giving Chavez the power to lead that country for life, that news article points out: "Other reforms would create new types of property to be managed by cooperatives, give neighborhood-based "communal councils" administrative responsibilities usually reserved for elected officials..." Do I see a new future in this country for community organizing groups like ACORN?
The sad thing about socialism is that, in the long run, it doesn't work. In the 1950's to 1970's, some European governments tried to nationalize things like banks, railroads, and airlines. It didn't work, and those things, today, have been returned to the public sector. Russia and China have since succumbed to the ways of capitalism because the furthest left of socialist society, communism, didn't work either. Those countries who stayed with it, like North Korea and Cuba, have done nothing but drag their countries into the depths of economic nonexistence. Thousand are starving in North Korea as that country pursues it's military aspirations. Cuba is isolated and people scrape together spare parts so they can drive around in U.S. made cars from the 1950's and 1960's.
Venezuela is on track for a similar fate. Inflation in that country is just making the poor poorer (See Full Story). Milk and eggs and other essential foods are missing from grocery shelves (See story and listen to the audio). In a country that is awash with energy in the form of oil, there is a shortage of electricity, as seen in this news article: "Oil powerhouse Venezuela struggles to keep lights on" (click for article).
Chavez took over because of his populist message that appealed to the poor and the lower middle classes. This is, in essence, the Obama message; although, he has conveniently tailored that message of today to make it seem like the middle class will get the greatest benefit. But, it isn't the middle class that actually benefits from Obama's plans for this country. His plan is to redistribute income and wealth to the lowest income levels who don't even pay taxes; and, that is an attempt to turn America into a socialist, welfare state. Venezuela is an example of what Obama wants and what this country could ultimately be. As you can see, it ain't a pretty picture. The belief that you can take wealth away from a country's wealth builders is a failed belief that has been tested and proven wrong in one socialist attempt after another. Socialism only breeds inflation and shortages of goods and services with the poor getting hurt the most. Hopefully, this country won't be as complacent as Venezuela was in letting things get as far out of hand as they have today. Just hopefully!
Take, for example, Barack Obama's current stand on taxes. Then, read this CNN News article from April 1999, "Venezuela's Chavez assumes new powers, readies new taxes", and I think you will hear an echo in Barack's pledges of today. Chavez's reference of "leashing the devil" is in regard to the social and economic injustices of capitalism. Barack Obama's multiple comments on "spreading the wealth" sure sound a lot like Chavez's 2005 move to take land away from the wealthy and give it to those who are the lowest on the economic scale (See Full Story). One could argue that Chavez's seizure of lands is much different than just raising taxes on the rich so that money can be redistributed to the poorer in our economy. But, is it really?
When Maxine Waters talked about "socializing (err)...taking over" the oil companies in this video (Click to view) it was obvious that capitalism wasn't on her mind. Maxine is clearly taking a page out of Hugo Chavez's socialist/communist playbook when you read this story from 2007: "Chavez nationalizes oil companies" (click to view news article) .
And, doesn't this sound familiar: "Venezuela nets 4.3 billion US dollars in windfall oil profit tax" (Click to view complete article).
One thing that a leftist form of government can't stand is an opposing viewpoint. In this country, the Democrats are proposing the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" (See Wikipedia Article) to silence the right. In many ways, this is similar to some moves made by Hugo Chavez as seen in this news article: "Chavez to shut down opposition TV" (click to view). Certainly, neither move is intended to have a society with free and uncensored speech.
Chavez has gained more and more control because his left-wing political party has dominant control. Enough control to dramatically change the powers of that country (See Full Story). That control could be very similar to what might occur in this country in 2009 (See Full Story). Besides giving Chavez the power to lead that country for life, that news article points out: "Other reforms would create new types of property to be managed by cooperatives, give neighborhood-based "communal councils" administrative responsibilities usually reserved for elected officials..." Do I see a new future in this country for community organizing groups like ACORN?
The sad thing about socialism is that, in the long run, it doesn't work. In the 1950's to 1970's, some European governments tried to nationalize things like banks, railroads, and airlines. It didn't work, and those things, today, have been returned to the public sector. Russia and China have since succumbed to the ways of capitalism because the furthest left of socialist society, communism, didn't work either. Those countries who stayed with it, like North Korea and Cuba, have done nothing but drag their countries into the depths of economic nonexistence. Thousand are starving in North Korea as that country pursues it's military aspirations. Cuba is isolated and people scrape together spare parts so they can drive around in U.S. made cars from the 1950's and 1960's.
Venezuela is on track for a similar fate. Inflation in that country is just making the poor poorer (See Full Story). Milk and eggs and other essential foods are missing from grocery shelves (See story and listen to the audio). In a country that is awash with energy in the form of oil, there is a shortage of electricity, as seen in this news article: "Oil powerhouse Venezuela struggles to keep lights on" (click for article).
Chavez took over because of his populist message that appealed to the poor and the lower middle classes. This is, in essence, the Obama message; although, he has conveniently tailored that message of today to make it seem like the middle class will get the greatest benefit. But, it isn't the middle class that actually benefits from Obama's plans for this country. His plan is to redistribute income and wealth to the lowest income levels who don't even pay taxes; and, that is an attempt to turn America into a socialist, welfare state. Venezuela is an example of what Obama wants and what this country could ultimately be. As you can see, it ain't a pretty picture. The belief that you can take wealth away from a country's wealth builders is a failed belief that has been tested and proven wrong in one socialist attempt after another. Socialism only breeds inflation and shortages of goods and services with the poor getting hurt the most. Hopefully, this country won't be as complacent as Venezuela was in letting things get as far out of hand as they have today. Just hopefully!
Labels:
Barack Obama,
cuba,
Democrats,
hugo chavez,
nationalization,
north korean,
russia,
socialism,
Venezuela
Monday, August 18, 2008
The Putin Test
Obama, on the other hand, showed his weakness by calling for "both" parties to show restraint (See Full Story). How stupid was that! Should a person or party getting pummeled by someone who is bigger than them "show restraint"? Since then, Obama has now come closer to McCain's initial position from his initially weak position.
I think Obama failed the "Putin Test". If I were Vladamir Putin, I would be happy to see an Obama as the President of the United States. With McCain in office, he might have to be a lot more cautious. Obama's failing of this test just reflects what I had previously said in my blog entry: "Are We Ready For The Mistakes Of J.F.K., Again?" (Click for popup link to that blog entry). Once again, history is in the midst of another period when Russia is on the move. Do we really want another charismatic but totally unprepared rookie in the White House during such a critical period?
Image by azrainman's photostream* on Flickr with Creative Commons Licensing. All rights retained. (Click to View Other Works).
Labels:
Barack Obama,
cuba,
georgia,
JFK,
John F. Kennedy,
John McCain,
russia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)