Warming of US - Cuba relations?

[JAMC]

Cuba's president offers to meet Barack Obama | Waiting for Obama | The Economist

Not sure personally whether the new administration will look any differently on Cuba than the previous one - I have a feeling the default position in American politics is to simply wait for the government in Havana to collapse - even if it takes a very, very long time.

I for one would like to see a normalization of relations with Cuba. It could be the incentive they require to introduce political reform and instigate the introduction to multiparty democracy. Personally I would not attach any economic pre-conditions to any deals struck - over the last 5 decades, and for all it's problems, the Cubans have shaped their economy to suit their needs.

Even if the cubans are insisting on "unconditional" lifting of economic sanctions, what is there to lose? Castro's government has survived 50 years of economic isolation - doing away with trade restrictions may not result in a change of government in Cuba, but the current government isn't going anywhere.

[Tantal]

I have a feeling the default position in American politics is to simply wait for the government in Havana to collapse - even if it takes a very, very long time.

Which is the right approach to take. Why must it always be the U.S. offering to help regimes that we despise? I'd like to see the Cubans throw off the yoke of tyranny, have political and economic reforms, then join the rest of the world's economy. I'd love to go to Havana. That country could be rich based on U.S. tourism alone if they'd get rid of their communist dictatorship.

[Midas]

I'd love to go to Havana. That country could be rich based on U.S. tourism alone if they'd get rid of their communist dictatorship.

It's a really fascinating place to visit, you'd love it! I went there for 10 days a few years ago and despite it being a poor country, although far from the poorest I've seen, it's so vibrant and the people are so friendly and full of life. And if you like 1950s American cars, well......

[Expounder]

Cuba's president offers to meet Barack Obama | Waiting for Obama | The Economist

Not sure personally whether the new administration will look any differently on Cuba than the previous one - I have a feeling the default position in American politics is to simply wait for the government in Havana to collapse - even if it takes a very, very long time.

I for one would like to see a normalization of relations with Cuba. It could be the incentive they require to introduce political reform and instigate the introduction to multiparty democracy. Personally I would not attach any economic pre-conditions to any deals struck - over the last 5 decades, and for all it's problems, the Cubans have shaped their economy to suit their needs.

Even if the cubans are insisting on "unconditional" lifting of economic sanctions, what is there to lose? Castro's government has survived 50 years of economic isolation - doing away with trade restrictions may not result in a change of government in Cuba, but the current government isn't going anywhere.

Removing of the trade embargo would be a start. Normalisation of relationships would bring Cuba back into the world fold and improve the lot of Cubans. It wasn't the failure of the system which kept Cuba poor but the vengeful world embargo imposed by the US.

But we must remember Florida is full of right wing Cuban Ex Pats who want revenge,so normalisation would be a slow process,as the security of the Cubans would have to be considered.

[Albion 69]

I think normalising relations may be of use as it could hasten the collapse of the Communist regime. But there should be preconditions especially in relation to political prisoners and guarantee's about free press and freedom of speech/dissent.

The lot of the Cuban people would be best served by doing anything that hastens the demise of the current regime and not indulging in any attempt to romanticize or excuse Castro 's actions.

Cuba Archive - Truth and Memory

[JAMC]

Which is the right approach to take. Why must it always be the U.S. offering to help regimes that we despise?

I don't think removing a trade embargo that the US imposed off it's own back could be described as "helping" - more like "not hindering". Cuba isn't asking for any special assistance from the US, just to be subject to the same trade framework as other nations.

I'd like to see the Cubans throw off the yoke of tyranny, have political and economic reforms, then join the rest of the world's economy. I'd love to go to Havana. That country could be rich based on U.S. tourism alone if they'd get rid of their communist dictatorship.

I don't think the Cubans are quite ready to trade their national dignity for US tourist dollars quite yet. While the country is somewhat isolated, the population isn't ignorant of their placing in the region - part of the reason Castro's government has lasted so long might be because the population doesn't want Cuba to become another Haiti.

[Tantal]

I don't think the Cubans are quite ready to trade their national dignity for US tourist dollars quite yet. While the country is somewhat isolated, the population isn't ignorant of their placing in the region - part of the reason Castro's government has lasted so long might be because the population doesn't want Cuba to become another Haiti.

Is that the same "national dignity" that causes them to risk their lives on the high seas trying to get to Florida?

Whether they become another Haiti or not is completely up to them. They could just as easily become another Puerto Rico, or a tourist haven like Cancun. It's up to them, but their communism is getting them nowhere.

[JAMC]

Is that the same "national dignity" that causes them to risk their lives on the high seas trying to get to Florida?

Clearly, not everyone feels the same way - as illustrated by Expounder's earlier post.

Whether they become another Haiti or not is completely up to them. They could just as easily become another Puerto Rico, or a tourist haven like Cancun. It's up to them, but their communism is getting them nowhere.

Rather avoiding US culpability for implementing an embargo aren't you? You cannot adopt the "Cuba's fete is up to the Cubans" position, and then condone/ignore/otherwise-sidestep the issue of a US imposed trade embargo. In that situation, the true position is "Cuba's fete is up to the Cubans, unless they persue a direction we disagree with, at which point we will actively intervene to change that fete."

[Tantal]

Rather avoiding US culpability for implementing an embargo aren't you? You cannot adopt the "Cuba's fete is up to the Cubans" position, and then condone/ignore/otherwise-sidestep the issue of a US imposed trade embargo. In that situation, the true position is "Cuba's fete is up to the Cubans, unless they persue a direction we disagree with, at which point we will actively intervene to change that fete."

That's the cross one bears for cozying up to the Soviets during the Cold War when they're 90 miles off of our coast, then invite them to install missles there. At this point, I don't really think it's the "communism" per se that keeps us from normalizing relations and trade with Cuba. If their regime wants to tax people through the nose to provide "free" healthcare, education, etc. to all, I don't think the U.S. would get all bent out of shape about it. Hell, the U.K. does it and we don't make a peep. I think that the major obstacle is the lack of freedom, the number of political prisoners that the regime holds, and the reports of human rights abuses by those that manage to make it to the U.S.

[Expounder]

That's the cross one bears for cozying up to the Soviets during the Cold War when they're 90 miles off of our coast, then invite them to install missles there. At this point, I don't really think it's the "communism" per se that keeps us from normalizing relations and trade with Cuba. If their regime wants to tax people through the nose to provide "free" healthcare, education, etc. to all, I don't think the U.S. would get all bent out of shape about it. Hell, the U.K. does it and we don't make a peep. I think that the major obstacle is the lack of freedom, the number of political prisoners that the regime holds, and the reports of human rights abuses by those that manage to make it to the U.S.

What you fail to understand Tantal, that the average European, or in fact, the population of most of the world, dosen't think like the average American red neck.

People like yourself are an extreme minority, who's sounding off about your opinions concerning the rest of the world is becoming more and more irrelevant.

Castro far from being hated by millions in the world, is hailed as a hero by the millions who have been subject to American suppression meted out by murdering despots installed by US policy makers, and also millions in Europe and West who have seen Castro confound the US embargo the bay of pigs invasion numerous poisoning attempts.

America made Castro and Cuba what it is today by trying to starve Cuba into submission, and by engaging in thousands of acts of espionage and in attemps to overthrow a popular revolution which freed the poorer Cuban people from the vile reign of Baptista and the Mafia, who used Cuba as a brothel and gambling casino and treated them like dirt.

Of course their were escapees who flocked to Cuba when Castro took over they were the privileged, who were part of the supression of the poor in Cuba and knew that their privileged days of fur coats, loads of money,and big cars were over so they followed Baptista and the Mafia out of the door screaming blue murder about their plight, with the American rich horrified at the thought that it could the spark the fire which might engulf them.

Castro had no option other than accept assistance from The Soviet Union other than surrender the country back into the arms on the Mafia and crooked American polititians. He had no choice given the strangulating embago and the ever present threat of invasion by the rabid right emigre's, funded by the US. This caused extreme hardship which the majority of Cubans accepted as the price of being free from the obscenities of the American dominated old regime.

Cuba's existence has been threatened many times since it's inception
by outside and inside acts of sabotage by CIA agents, and it's not suprising that those involved and caught on Cuban territory ended up incarcerated. It meant Cubans had to be on their guard 24/7.

Had America adopted a different policy from the onset towards Cuba through diplomacy and tact Cuba may have been a different place today. But diplomacy and tact as we have witnessed over last few decades are not in the American dictionary. Brute force is the Answer to any percieved poltical problem.

Whether you like it or not America is fast running out of steam and is seeing a number of other major players emerging on the world stage challenging it's world hegemony.

I hope Cuba maintains it's total independace from the US and Obama sees fit to adopt a more conciliatory policy than his predecessros towards Cuba.
If he does there are bound to be changes for the best in Cuba with a more relaxed way of life which will still include universal medicare and all of the other social benifits established by the Castro regime.

[Midas]

Yet again I find myself agreeing with you Expounder; this is getting worrying

I have a good many friends in America, and as individual people they're great, however the majority of them do have this blind spot in that they believe unreservedly that the US is always right, far more than friends I have in other countries believe their country is always right. I'm talking about the 90% of the population who are quite moderate in their views here of course, not the few extremists either end of the political/religious spectrum.

Quite why there is this national trait I don't know; certainly the vast majority of US media is very US-centric and that must have an effect, but with the advent of international news and views from around the world being so readily available to one and all I still find it very surprising. A good example of this was during the Gulf War when I was in the Caribbean for a few weeks. Flicking between cable channels on the hotel TV someone could easily have been forgiven for thinking that American reporters were talking about a different war to reporters from other countries, the US bias was so great. The BBC might report on "the US, UK and coalition victory at..." but Fox or CNN would report just on "the US victory" as though no-one else existed, or mattered.

A few years ago a good friend, a very intelligent lady who worked for a stockbroker in New York, came over to Europe for a few weeks, the first time she'd ever been outside of America. We'd had quite a number of past discussions about this particularly US-centric view Americans have and she'd always just dismissed it, yet within minutes of meeting up with her halfway through her European trip, she was saying how amazed she was to actually see how the view of the rest of the world on a whole range of subjects was so different to the view she'd been exposed to back home, something I've encountered many times since. It seems that for most Americans they've got to get out of the country first before they start to believe what the rest of the world says about them.

Their views about Cuba are no different.

[Albion 69]

I think this link is rather pertinent to this thread .... The hellish mindset of Cuba-enthusiasts | Minette Marrin - Times Online .

[Expounder]

I think this link is rather pertinent to this thread .... The hellish mindset of Cuba-enthusiasts | Minette Marrin - Times Online .

How irritating it is for her, what a shame, Cuba would not have been in the situation it is but for the American funded emigre Attacks espionage and assassaination attempts.

Castro is still regarded as a hero by millions for kicking out an obscene regime that would no doubt still be wiping it's boots on the Cuban poor had he not done so.

The Mob-Intelligence Connection (part1)

[Albion 69]

How irritating it is for her, what a shame, Cuba would not have been in the situation it is but for the American funded emigre Attacks espionage and assassaination attempts.

Castro is still regarded as a hero by millions for kicking out an obscene regime that would no doubt still be wiping it's boots on the Cuban poor had he not done so.

The millions who do (as she points out) probably haven't got a clue about life in Cuba. Blame it all on the US if you want Exp but i think you let an extremely unpleasant tyrant and his repressive awful regime off the hook by doing so .

Essential Background: Overview of human rights issues in Cuba (Human Rights Watch World Report 2008, 31-1-2008)

[JAMC]

That's the cross one bears for cozying up to the Soviets during the Cold War when they're 90 miles off of our coast, then invite them to install missles there.

It isn't wise to punish a society indefinitely for the actions of two generations past. I think you said on another thread that a life sentence in the US equates to 60 years? Well it's 50 years this year since Batista was overthrown. Most individuals who held political office in Cuba in 1962 are either dead, dying (Fidel himself falls into this category) or retired. How long do you intend to punish the sons for the cold-war 'sins' of the fathers - or in most cases, the grandfathers?

At this point, I don't really think it's the "communism" per se that keeps us from normalizing relations and trade with Cuba. If their regime wants to tax people through the nose to provide "free" healthcare, education, etc. to all, I don't think the U.S. would get all bent out of shape about it. Hell, the U.K. does it and we don't make a peep. I think that the major obstacle is the lack of freedom, the number of political prisoners that the regime holds, and the reports of human rights abuses by those that manage to make it to the U.S.

Considering some of the (pro-market) tyrants the US has jumped into bed with over the years, I think it is the communism.

[JAMC]

I think this link is rather pertinent to this thread .... The hellish mindset of Cuba-enthusiasts | Minette Marrin - Times Online .

Hmmm....

I appreciate your position - to a point. The article speaks of reserving judgement in the face of ignorance. I don't necessarily dispute that as a reasonable stance to take. However there are things we can know for sure, and some of those things are within our control or influence (i.e. embargo). It is not neccesarily wrong to voice concern when the limited pieces of information we do have add up to an ugly, albeit incomplete, picture - so long as the argument remains open to new facts.

For me it has never been about the potential merits or horrors of daily life in Cuba. That is something the west cannot directly control. We can at least ensure that our own dealings are not based on spite, domestic rhetoric or political prejudice.

[JAMC]

What you fail to understand Tantal....

Setting aside our differences over Russia/Georgia for a second, I often wonder what alternative views such as this sound like to conservative Americans.

My guess is that it sounds like the class teacher speaking to Charlie Brown in Peanuts.

[Expounder]

Setting aside our differences over Russia/Georgia for a second, I often wonder what alternative views such as this sound like to conservative Americans.

My guess is that it sounds like the class teacher speaking to Charlie Brown in Peanuts.

Given the opportunity of free trade and an effort in diplomatic international relations Cuba will change, it is the only openly "Socialist" regime left. The only reason it has maintained it's insular claustraphobic and tight securitised economy is because of the everpresent threat of American funded invasion and the embargo.

If the rest of world had ignored the embargo stranglehold after the fall of Soviet "Communism" and had traded fully and openly with Cuba and had proper Diplomatic relations I feel that the political and economic situation would have been totally different.

How can anyone expect a country under siege and a threat of invasion to be any different to that of Britain during WW2 under siege from Germany, where rights of the individual were set aside and citizens were expected to inform on other citizens in the name of security and thousands were imprisoned for percieved alliegance to the enemy and the population living on weekly rations that wouldn't feed some of our present population for breakfast. And become a prison state not disimilar to Cuba.

Ok, Britain was defending democracy and Cuba is not.However the Cuban regime was born out of neccessary revolution, there was no other way of ridding the country of an American sponsered vile criminal regime. Casto was under siege and at war, one not of his making from day one.There was never a period of normalisation to test the regime.

From that moment in time, Cuba was under siege and has been so ever since and has never been given the opportunity of dealing in fair trade and has suffered severe shortages of every concievable medicine and raw material. Yet in spite of this, the Cuban government managed to implement some of the most advanced forms of social welfare in the western world.

If Castro was an evil dictator bent on running Cuba in his own interests how and why would he, or could he, have managed this?

I'm glad we have maybe similar views on Cuba JAMC. With the Georgia conflict, I saw Georgia as the unprovoked aggressor who murdered people in their beds.

[Albion 69]

Hmmm....

I appreciate your position - to a point. The article speaks of reserving judgement in the face of ignorance. I don't necessarily dispute that as a reasonable stance to take. However there are things we can know for sure, and some of those things are within our control or influence (i.e. embargo). It is not neccesarily wrong to voice concern when the limited pieces of information we do have add up to an ugly, albeit incomplete, picture - so long as the argument remains open to new facts.

For me it has never been about the potential merits or horrors of daily life in Cuba. That is something the west cannot directly control. We can at least ensure that our own dealings are not based on spite, domestic rhetoric or political prejudice.

To clarify , i was not referring to your OP in relation to the link i provided ,it was relevant to some following posts . I think in an ideal world the sentence highlighted would be the way we should act but i am sure you would acknowledge international relations/diplomacy has little to do with idealism ... taking the least worst option being nearer the mark.

[Tantal]

Considering some of the (pro-market) tyrants the US has jumped into bed with over the years, I think it is the communism.

Not so much. The U.S. is awash in Commies. Why do you think I keep so much ammunition on hand?

[Expounder]

Not so much. The U.S. is awash in Commies. Why do you think I keep so much ammunition on hand?

I think your statement says it all, you sound like a throwback to the Mc Carthy area of the 50s when "Commies" seemed to be comming out of the woodwork.

I would hazard a guess that you see Obama as a "Commie" as he will be going into talks with all of the regimes you disagree with.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...-house-clinton

[Tantal]

I think your statement says it all, you sound like a throwback to the Mc Carthy area of the 50s when "Commies" seemed to be comming out of the woodwork.

I would hazard a guess that you see Obama as a "Commie" as he will be going into talks with all of the regimes you disagree with.

McCarthy was right. We were infested with Communists. And, yes, Obama is one as well. Just look at his religion. I know, many Americans think that Obama is a Muslim, but not me. He is a practitioner of "Liberation Theology" invented by a Marxist monk in South America. This "Liberation Theology" is nothing more than Marxist ideology with a little carefully selected, twisted, and convoluted scripture thrown in to make it marketable and to give the impression that God wants us to be Marxists. It is merely an attempt to give divine sanction to leftist political ideology. Why do you think that Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Louis Farrakhan are so chummy even though one is a "Christian" and the other a Muslim? It's because neither of their "religions" have much to do with God, and everything to do with politics.

[Expounder]

McCarthy was right. We were infested with Communists. And, yes, Obama is one as well. Just look at his religion. I know, many Americans think that Obama is a Muslim, but not me. He is a practitioner of "Liberation Theology" invented by a Marxist monk in South America. This "Liberation Theology" is nothing more than Marxist ideology with a little carefully selected, twisted, and convoluted scripture thrown in to make it marketable and to give the impression that God wants us to be Marxists. It is merely an attempt to give divine sanction to leftist political ideology. Why do you think that Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Louis Farrakhan are so chummy even though one is a "Christian" and the other a Muslim? It's because neither of their "religions" have much to do with God, and everything to do with politics.

I'm an atheist, but as an ex catholic, I went to enough catechism classes to realise if God did exist he would be leaning toward Socialism

[Tantal]

I'm an atheist, but as an ex catholic, I went to enough catechism classes to realise if God did exist he would be leaning toward Socialism

Not so much. While true that the Bible is full of references to helping your fellow man, I don't think that a brutal, confiscatory system of government is what he had in mind.

[Opinionated]

Not so much. While true that the Bible is full of references to helping your fellow man, I don't think that a brutal, confiscatory system of government is what he had in mind.

No, thats quite true. In fact Christ preached that the faithful should surrender their wealth and follow him, he also preached that commerce had no place in faith (when he turned over the money lenders tables) and that the faithful should "render unto Caesar".

[Tantal]

No, thats quite true. In fact Christ preached that the faithful should surrender their wealth and follow him, he also preached that commerce had no place in faith (when he turned over the money lenders tables) and that the faithful should "render unto Caesar".

"Render unto Caesar" is a reference to faith being on a higher moral plane than economics. It means, "just give Caesar his damned money and forget about it.....we have more important things to worry about", not "everyone needs to give all of your money to Caesar so that he can re-distribute it equitably." Jesus didn't care about politics and government because he was ABOVE government. He had no time for petty politics OR social economic policy.

[Opinionated]

"Render unto Caesar" is a reference to faith being on a higher moral plane than economics. It means, "just give Caesar his damned money and forget about it.....we have more important things to worry about", not "everyone needs to give all of your money to Caesar so that he can re-distribute it equitably." Jesus didn't care about politics and government because he was ABOVE government. He had no time for petty politics OR social economic policy.

Just give Caesar HIS damned money - no reference to what Caesar was going to do with it, so if the New Testament is still applicable (and as a Christian I know you do, as incidently do I) then for Caesar we must read US (or UK) Government, it's their money so if they want to feed the world with it or spend it all on a great big wine cellar we as Christians should have more heavenly matters on our minds.

[JAMC]

McCarthy was right.

To me, this is only a couple of degrees away from saying Stalin was right.

What you're basically supporting is the purging of political opposition from Society - the only difference added by the McCarthy caveat is that you're content to see people incarcerated, censored and economically isolated - but not murdered. The only line left for you to cross is... "You know what? It's quicker and cheaper to just kill 'em."

[Midas]

Just give Caesar HIS damned money - no reference to what Caesar was going to do with it, so if the New Testament is still applicable (and as a Christian I know you do, as incidently do I) then for Caesar we must read US (or UK) Government, it's their money so if they want to feed the world with it or spend it all on a great big wine cellar we as Christians should have more heavenly matters on our minds.

I do hope that you aren't serious with that remark! Our first priority is to our own country and its people, and most definitely in the here and now! In a sense our tax money might be the government's, however that same government was elected by us to run this country, not anywhere else. If in doing that, others less fortunate than ourselves in the wider world are helped, all well and good, but it's our welfare that should come first each and every time.

[Expounder]

McCarthy was right. We were infested with Communists. And, yes, Obama is one as well. Just look at his religion. I know, many Americans think that Obama is a Muslim, but not me. He is a practitioner of "Liberation Theology" invented by a Marxist monk in South America. This "Liberation Theology" is nothing more than Marxist ideology with a little carefully selected, twisted, and convoluted scripture thrown in to make it marketable and to give the impression that God wants us to be Marxists. It is merely an attempt to give divine sanction to leftist political ideology. Why do you think that Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Louis Farrakhan are so chummy even though one is a "Christian" and the other a Muslim? It's because neither of their "religions" have much to do with God, and everything to do with politics.

Tantal, have you not considered that you could be a victim of your own claustrophobic community and it's propaganda?

[Opinionated]

I do hope that you aren't serious with that remark! Our first priority is to our own country and its people, and most definitely in the here and now! In a sense our tax money might be the government's, however that same government was elected by us to run this country, not anywhere else. If in doing that, others less fortunate than ourselves in the wider world are helped, all well and good, but it's our welfare that should come first each and every time.

No on a secular level I do agree with you to some extent; I was trying to give a literal interpretation of the bible to counter Tantal's argument that Jesus wouldn't have approved of a socialist government!

[Midas]

No on a secular level I do agree with you to some extent; I was trying to give a literal interpretation of the bible to counter Tantal's argument that Jesus wouldn't have approved of a socialist government!

Phew!! But on the second point you could be right; Jewish society at the time was very community-based, and although politics as we know them today didn't exist, I'd say there's a strong argument to be put that Jesus (always assuming he did actually exist, as far as I know there's only one single extra-biblical reference to him and that's by Josephus, but that's rather a different topic) would indeed be socialist, although probably with a small letter 's'.

[Tantal]

Tantal, have you not considered that you could be a victim of your own claustrophobic community and it's propaganda?

Not really. Have you considered the possibility that you may have been educated beyond your intelligence?

[Midas]

Tantal, have you not considered that you could be a victim of your own claustrophobic community and it's propaganda?

Not wishing to upset Tantal, he's got more guns than I have, but having had both business and personal connections with people in America for many years, there's much more than just a grain of truth in saying that many people there are indeed victims of the often claustrophobic community and the very US-centric propaganda which is very prevalent.

Not knowing victims I must add, many people I've spoken to about a variety of international issues simply haven't heard the non-American side of whatever story is currently in the news. I think I've already mentioned the fact that when I was in the Caribbean during the Gulf War, the US cable channels in my hotel didn't even mention any coalition forces which were there, it was all "our troops and their great victories at......".

It's sad that there's such paranoia in the US government, and that there's such a prevalent "the world begins and ends with America" attitude of many of its citizens

[Expounder]

Not really. Have you considered the possibility that you may have been educated beyond your intelligence?

Thats an impossibility I'm Soooooooooooooooooooo Intelligent

[Tantal]

No on a secular level I do agree with you to some extent; I was trying to give a literal interpretation of the bible to counter Tantal's argument that Jesus wouldn't have approved of a socialist government!

My argument was that Jesus had no time for government, period. It was a worldly thing that was beneath him. So, in "rendering unto Caesar", what do you think that Jesus' position would have been if Caesar's cut started to cut into the church's tithe? Would he have us give the tithe to the church even if it meant that Caesar wouldn't get his full tax, or would he prefer that Caesar get his full amount at the expense of the church?

[Tantal]

Not wishing to upset Tantal, he's got more guns than I have.......

You needn't fret about such things, Midas. I don't possess a firearm that will reach completely across the pond.................................yet.:Wink:

[Tantal]

What you fail to understand Tantal, that the average European, or in fact, the population of most of the world, dosen't think like the average American red neck.

Redneck??? Seriously? Is that what we've come to? Just because I have a different opinion from you and the lefties AND reside in Texas then I must be just sittin' on my front porch in overalls and straw hat, chewin' tobacco, and pickin' the tune from
Deliverance on my banjo? Is there anything about my posts that indicates to you that I am insufficiently educated? Poor spelling? Poor punctuation? Poor grammar and sentence structure? Consider yourself fortunate that I'm caucasian. Such a sweeping generalization about anyone of color would get you a good gut-stomping by the P.C. Brigade.

[Midas]

You needn't fret about such things, Midas. I don't possess a firearm that will reach completely across the pond.................................yet.:Wink:

Don't tell me, you've put in an offer for the odd redundant ICBM or two

[Tantal]

Don't tell me, you've put in an offer for the odd redundant ICBM or two

Unfortunately, ICBMs are tightly controlled, even in the U.S. Besides, I like to buy my weapons "off paper" so that Uncle Sugar doesn't know what I've got. I'm sure there'd be some forms involved with an ICBM purchase.

[Expounder]

Redneck??? Seriously? Is that what we've come to? Just because I have a different opinion from you and the lefties AND reside in Texas then I must be just sittin' on my front porch in overalls and straw hat, chewin' tobacco, and pickin' the tune from
Deliverance on my banjo? Is there anything about my posts that indicates to you that I am insufficiently educated? Poor spelling? Poor punctuation? Poor grammar and sentence structure? Consider yourself fortunate that I'm caucasian. Such a sweeping generalization about anyone of color would get you a good gut-stomping by the P.C. Brigade.

Red neck as I understand it is an accepted part of the Amercan language whats more suprising some even voted for Obama. Is it not a term for people who work out in the open who are agricultural or cattle "persons" and caucasian I'd better watch my PC when I'm describing them. Sorry Tantal as I have never met you in person I shouldn't have assumed you were a red neck. Your posts I thought gave me a clue. Am I forgiven?


Rednecks for Obama - Rednecks for Obama

[Midas]

Red neck as I understand it is an accepted part of the Amercan language......

FWIW the dictionary definition of 'Redneck' is a/ "a poor White person in the southern United States" and b/ "a bigot or reactionary, esp. from the American rural working class".

[Tantal]

FWIW the dictionary definition of 'Redneck' is a/ "a poor White person in the southern United States" and b/ "a bigot or reactionary, esp. from the American rural working class".

Yes, but the word "redneck" is much like the word "nigger". We can use it amongst ourselves, but if anyone else uses it, he had best be prepared to scramble.

[Albion 69]

A reminder to members this threads Topic is US/Cuban relations , feel free to discuss other issues in a New thread in the appropriate part of the Forum .

[JAMC]

...pickin' the tune from
Deliverance on my banjo?

Never understood this part of the stereotype. The banjo is a hard instrument to play!

But err.... on topic - the embargo should be lifted.