quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


[Ever hear of david wu?
Ever hear of grace meng?

Wu, not in congress. resigned in disgrace.
Meng, born in queens.

Fail

Resigning in disgrace means he was never a taiwanese american congressman?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Toward the end of this decade, I am really going to enjoy my coffee and Cuban Sandwich by the sea wall as I ponder going back to my five star hotel and deciding if I want to play blackjack or craps that evening. I'll have a Cuba Libre or perhaps a Mojito in your honor tompsonx and toast "¡Por Cuba Libre!" Heck.... I may even take up smoking cigars again.

Honestly, I can't wait...

Viva La Revolution Baby

Can't you do that now?
You are not afraid of the punks from miami machine gunning your villa in a drive by in a picklefork are you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
What do you mean by soviet expansionism?

quote:

quote:

That may be where the double standard originated, although why it continued even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Soviet Union - that seems a bit mystifying.

Any idea why the berlin wall was built in the first place?

quote:

quote:

China is clearly bigger than Cuba, so maybe that has something to do with the double-standard.

I also think that, historically, the U.S. has had a different perception of nations within our own hemisphere versus nations in the other hemisphere. Our hegemony over the Western Hemisphere had been firmly established before we started to make inroads in spreading our hegemony into the Eastern Hemisphere.

War with the "barbary priates" circa 1804 would be the beginning of our expansionism outside of the western hemisphere.

quote:

quote:

We had the Monroe Doctrine in our own region, yet we favored the Open China policy over in that country. It was just after the Spanish-American War, in which Cuba figured prominently, as we "liberated" that country from Spanish rule, recognized their independence,

Please acquaint yourself with the platt ammendment...that document makes it quite clear that cuba is a client of the u.s. and not a soverign naton.

quote:

quote:

while keeping Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. Why we needed those territories is also a bit mystifying, although considering the annexations we made as a result of that war, it's rather curious that we didn't choose to keep Cuba, too.

We did but in a bit of a sureptitious fashion (platt ammendment).

quote:

quote:

Another possible reason for the double-standard is that with Cuba, there seems to be something personal about it. While this is just idle speculation on my part, with heavy Mob influence in Cuba being kicked out so suddenly, it could be that some very highly-placed individuals in the U.S. might have a very strong grudge against Castro. The idea that the Mob never forgets and never forgives might be in play here. The fact that Cuban cigars are still banned - even when we were selling wheat to the Soviets - that sounds like something personal to me, as if the powers that be are really, really pissed off at Cuba for reasons that go beyond geopolitical rivalries.

That is as good of an excuse as any I have heard.

quote:

I don't think we had that kind of relationship with China. When the Chinese Communist Revolution was taking place, we considered both factions to be "allies," as it was just after World War II, when the Chinese Communists and Chinese Nationalists were both fighting the Japanese. I think that General Marshall tried to mediate between the two sides, but ended up disgusted with both. (We had already knocked heads with the Chinese Nationalists previously, so they were not really "puppets" of the US - not like Cuba's pre-revolutionary government was.) Truman was more focused on Europe at the time and didn't seem to be able to formulate much of a coherent policy in East Asia (or in the Middle East for that matter).

The truman doctrin took us directly to korea and viet nam.

quote:

quote:

In contrast, in our region, our policy had already been (more or less) set in the previous century. While our expansionist foray into Canada fell flat, we saw the collapsing Spanish Empire to our south as an opportunity for expansion. We grabbed Florida, and then a huge chunk of Mexico and firmly established a hegemonic relationship throughout the rest of Latin America after Spain was booted out completely from the Americas. Because of this, countries like Cuba and Venezuela have had more long-term experience in dealing with "Yankee imperialism" than the Chinese ever did.

I it possible that our "gunboat diplomacy" didn't work with red china because they would have kicked our asses

quote:

quote:

We may be able to deal with China on a more reasonable level, since there's not as much bad blood as there has been with our neighbors to the south.

I would disagree...we have been poking our finger in china's eye pretty regularly...my opinion is that they are just as pissed as our latin neighbors and will extract their "pound of flesh" when they have the opportunity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Perhaps. It's hard to make these comparisons anyway, because China and Latin America are just so different, and the U.S. relationships with China and Cuba have also been vastly different. However, I would surmise that China's shit list is probably quite a bit longer than any Latin American country. China's wrath may be directed at several countries of which America is only one, whereas with the Latin American countries, they only have one country at which to direct their wrath.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YN

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Perhaps. It's hard to make these comparisons anyway, because China and Latin America are just so different, and the U.S. relationships with China and Cuba have also been vastly different. However, I would surmise that China's shit list is probably quite a bit longer than any Latin American country. China's wrath may be directed at several countries of which America is only one, whereas with the Latin American countries, they only have one country at which to direct their wrath.

Actually Europeans are about as high on Latin American "shit lists" as the United States, and while public opinion of the United States is improving, that of the EU and its various member states is declining. Spain, France, the UK and the Netherlands, and their colonial remnants also have an unsavory past and are also seen as meddling neo-colonial imperialists. Even Canada has managed to get on the bandwagon, and Israeli handiwork in Colombia stinks.

World public opinion polls are online, the last set had the EU falling below the United States, and China above either here, this is why the EU is spending a third of a billion euros in a public relations campaign hoping to clean up their image.

The United States has been attempting to behave lately (since at least the Clinton presidency) while the Europeans have been seen as weapons mongering, drug trade funding, money laundering corporate imperialists, and as supporters of reactionaries and colonialism. While those in the United States are familiar with what is done in their name, the Anglo press is pretty well silent on the unsavory activities of European nations and the EU.

China is now in the position where nobody on the planet is capable of pushing them about, and Brasil is also becoming a very powerful nation. And both are quite active in positive ways here. Chavez was a part of this, and as far as can be seen, his successors will continue this Venezuelan path.

As Latin American integration continues, it will become increasingly difficult to interfere, I think the policy makers in the United States have figured this out, while the Europeans still think it is still the 18th century.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I think the U.S. has slowly learned that we can't take Latin America for granted, and our politicians are recognizing the growing power of Latino voters within America. In the face of our current geopolitical dilemmas, our best bet right now might be to try to strengthen ties with Latin America. I remember when NAFTA was passed, there was talk about a free-trade zone through the Americas (AFTA) with the "Amero" as a proposed unified currency. Something like the EU for North and South America. Of course, there's a great deal of opposition to the proposal, so it doesn't look it'll happen anytime soon.

Still, if you consider the combined resources and populations of all of North and South America, it would be a rather formidable power bloc on the global scene. There might be some potential there, especially if we're worried about China and the Middle East.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YN

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I think the U.S. has slowly learned that we can't take Latin America for granted, and our politicians are recognizing the growing power of Latino voters within America. In the face of our current geopolitical dilemmas, our best bet right now might be to try to strengthen ties with Latin America. I remember when NAFTA was passed, there was talk about a free-trade zone through the Americas (AFTA) with the "Amero" as a proposed unified currency. Something like the EU for North and South America. Of course, there's a great deal of opposition to the proposal, so it doesn't look it'll happen anytime soon.

Still, if you consider the combined resources and populations of all of North and South America, it would be a rather formidable power bloc on the global scene. There might be some potential there, especially if we're worried about China and the Middle East.

China is seen as a better nation then the United States or the Europeans by very many now here, they wish business and trade, deal honestly, and leave their guns, hooligans, and spies at home when they do.

As for the Middle East, the Europeans and the Anglo-Americans made that bed for themselves in the name of corporate oil greed. They will be reaping the crop they sowed for a century or more still. When the puppet states in the Persian Gulf collapse, things you have seen to date will be minor by comparison.

The move is towards greater integration, organizations such as UNASUR (a union,) ALADI (free trade association,) CELAC (OAS without the Anglo-Americans), and SELA are works towards this end.

By 2050 Brasil will be in the top five nations, and Mexico will be in the top ten, and then consider that they will be a part of UNASUR, with a continent and a half unified the union will be indeed a major economic player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

Unless that collapse happens in the immediate future, the Chinese will have sufficient control of their production facilities very soon, and will be producing enough to buy and sell ARAMCO in either case.

At that point, look for extremists to suddenly remember how many Muslim folks Mao actually turned into fertilizer.

Hating America will be sooooo 2012...

quote:

ORIGINAL: YN

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I think the U.S. has slowly learned that we can't take Latin America for granted, and our politicians are recognizing the growing power of Latino voters within America. In the face of our current geopolitical dilemmas, our best bet right now might be to try to strengthen ties with Latin America. I remember when NAFTA was passed, there was talk about a free-trade zone through the Americas (AFTA) with the "Amero" as a proposed unified currency. Something like the EU for North and South America. Of course, there's a great deal of opposition to the proposal, so it doesn't look it'll happen anytime soon.

Still, if you consider the combined resources and populations of all of North and South America, it would be a rather formidable power bloc on the global scene. There might be some potential there, especially if we're worried about China and the Middle East.

China is seen as a better nation then the United States or the Europeans by very many now here, they wish business and trade, deal honestly, and leave their guns, hooligans, and spies at home when they do.

As for the Middle East, the Europeans and the Anglo-Americans made that bed for themselves in the name of corporate oil greed. They will be reaping the crop they sowed for a century or more still. When the puppet states in the Persian Gulf collapse, things you have seen to date will be minor by comparison.

The move is towards greater integration, organizations such as UNASUR (a union,) ALADI (free trade association,) CELAC (OAS without the Anglo-Americans), and SELA are works towards this end.

By 2050 Brasil will be in the top five nations, and Mexico will be in the top ten, and then consider that they will be a part of UNASUR, with a continent and a half unified the union will be indeed a major economic player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Listening to Bob Marley today,I recall a phrase he used that went "we`re sick and tired of your "ism schism"...meaning that the world is growing tired of cold war,nations/leaders who war monger and those who spread fear and hate.
.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YN

The collapse is already underway, the unrest in the Gulf protectorates are feathers on the bird of revolution.

And the Arab puppet state's dwindling oil will not be nearly as important in even a decade to anyone, either east or west, and China has spent great effort insuring their oil supply is secured, along with any other necessary commodities.

When the Muslim extremists consider their list of foreign devils, the various ones to their west will still head their lists. Without the United States to act as their thugs, the EU will be paying for several centuries of their Middle Eastern adventurism.

quote:

Any idea why the berlin wall was built in the first place?

quote:

As I understand it, the Berlin Wall was built because too many people were escaping from East Germany into West Germany, and the Communists didn't like losing so many people. They had to keep them inside the Iron Curtain, so they built a wall and shot anyone attempting to escape.

quote:

War with the "barbary priates" circa 1804 would be the beginning of our expansionism outside of the western hemisphere.

quote:

I don't think I would count that as expansionism, though, since we did not permanently annex any territory as a result of that war.[/quote

Perhaps you might want to acquaint yourself with the facts before you make such ignorant statements . You might also want to cosider what constitutes "espansionism"

quote:

Our first territorial gains outside of the Western Hemisphere would be the territories gained in the Spanish-American War of 1898 (Philippines and Guam).

Should you choose to acquaint yourself with a history book written for someone beyond the fifth grade you will note that the u.s. was 13 states and not the possessor of the western hemisphere,north america or even the current day "continental 48".

(in reply to Zonie63)

quote:

Why would the Platt Amendment make references to Cuban independence, if according to you, the document "makes it quite clear" that Cuba wasn't independent?

quote:


The United States has been attempting to behave lately (since at least the Clinton presidency)...