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

Why Were We Even In Benghazi?

With information trickling out by the day, we are now getting a clearer picture of what took place in the lead up to the killing of 4 American's and the total destruction of our consulate in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11.  The picture we are now able to see is that we had an ambassador in Benghazi who was pleading for additional security as the violence in that country was increasing. Instead of providing the requested  security,  President Obama's and Hillary Clinton's State Department actually reduced it; leaving in place just 3 armed Americans and an additional security detail of 5 unarmed Libyans who were under contract by the Blue Mountain Group (an "outsourced" British contractor). Just what were those 5 unarmed Libyans supposed to do?  Just check names at the door when those nearly 200 armed terrorists flooded the compound?

The real problem here is total incompetence.

You had increasing violence with roving armed militias walking the streets of Benghazi and our government actually reduced security?  At the same time, the fledgling government of Libya had a totally ineffective national guard; unable to even protect themselves...let alone our personnel in Benghazi.  So this all begs a singular question:  Why were we even in Benghazi with a diplomatic mission?  Because, by being there -- without adequate security and amid increasing violence -- our State Department literally gave those now-dead Americans a death sentence.  This isn't just a "bump in the road" or not being "optimal" as the President has declared.  This was gross negligence by an incompetent President and his incompetent people.  This is a President who spent two weeks trying to hide the truth by floating that bogus YouTube video argument; when, in fact, he knew very well, the day of the killings, that it was a well orchestrated terrorist attack that had nothing to do with that video.

All Americans should be outraged!  A lot of heads should roll on this one...starting at the very top!

Related Information:

--- The Telegraph: British firm secured Benghazi consulate contract with little experience: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9607958/British-firm-secured-Benghazi-consulate-contract-with-little-experience.html

--- The Daily Beast:  Despite Threats, U.S. Cut Security in Libya Before Attacks: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/04/despite-threats-u-s-cut-security-in-libya-before-attacks.html

How Can Any Other Nation Trust Our UN Ambassador?

Following the Benghazi Embassy attack, Susan Rice -- our UN Ambassador -- was trotted out on the Sunday news talk show circuit to squelch the belief that what took place was a terrorist attack. Instead, she was to simply convince Americans that it was a result of that Coptic Christian video that mocked Muhammad.  This was despite the fact that many experts were saying just the opposite, and, over the last three weeks, Rice has clearly been proven wrong.  We now know that there was no gathering protest, but a  a well-coordinated and instantaneous attack.  Note this ABC Breaking News video of October 9th:




Of course, to protect Rice, the White House is now saying that the UN Ambassador was working with "wrong" information.

Make no mistake about it, the leaders of the world are watching this situation unfold.  And, what they are seeing is a Susan Rice, who is either easily hoodwinked or one that is given to easily lying.  Either way, this is not good.  We don't want world leaders to question our U.N. Ambassador's truthfulness.  And, as a country, we don't need an Ambassador who can be so easily mislead into believing something that was logically difficult to believe in the first place.  Then, too, one has to question an entire Obama Administration who spent more than three weeks lying to America.

At the very least, I think Rice should resign or be let go.