Cuban's denied

[tamu33]

Treasury department has said that because of the embargo, Cuba will not be allowed in the World Classic.

What do you guys think? Should we still have this feud with Castro?

[Tim Whitehead]

No, I think its time for the embargo to be over.

[KnoxVegas]

My alma mater can go there two years ago and play baseball games. They can travel here and play the Orioles a few years ago (I know. I know. Different administration) but not now? Ridiculous! The Cuban Embargo is almost 45 years old. Seems to be working well!

[FLAK]

When Castro dies we will probably lift it, this is out of spite though cause the bastard just won't die.

[tamu33]

Bumped because of Recent News

Puerto Rico has now withdrawn as host country for the World Classic in 2006.

The reason for this decision is because the United States' Treasury Department has announced that they will deny Cuba a permit to compete, which is a violation of the Olympic Charter," said Israel Roldan, president of the Amateur Puerto Rican Baseball Federation, in a letter to Aldo Notari, the International Federation's president.

Basically they are referring to a age old agreement (modernly known as the Olympic Charter) that allowed athletes and families to travel safely to the games and back. History provides us with some evidence that this "truce" was upheld because of the way Olympia was built. Olympia had no walls surrounding the Greek City which was very common if not the standard way to build a city in ancient times.

I have got to think that legally the US is in the wrong. Plus, I have to think that not allowing athletes to compete because of their home country is bodering on / if not blantant discrimination. This decision could spell disaster for the US Olympic Committee. For they are basically setting the bar for intolerance towards political enemies.

And in an effort to salvage the team, an association of Cuban exiles appealled to the International Federation (org that runs the World Classic) to play in place of Cuba. The IF must deny this appeal due to Cuba's membership in the IF, thus it will not support an unofficial team.

Basically, all this mess could lead to the IF not sanctioning the WC.

This is turning more and more towards a political fight by the hour. With our government already in the world's sore spot, I think that we might be on the verge of a very important shift in our policy.

[laxfan25]

Treasury department has said that because of the embargo, Cuba will not be allowed in the World Classic.

What do you guys think? Should we still have this feud with Castro?

I don't know. Do you think this lingering relic of a Cold War long since past might have anything to do with a wealthy, politically powerful interest group in Miami, FL? Hmm, I wonder who the governor of Florida is, and if he has any connections higher up in gov't?
We went through very similar political gyrations for many decades over the debate about turning over control of the Panama Canal, our canal, to a foreign government. Now that we've done it, does anyone remember all that, even though the canal operation has obviously gone to h*ll?
Despite his human rights abuses, and despite the obvious economic pain that has been induced by our embargo, Fidel has actually led one of the more successful people's revolutions in history. Literacy in Cuba is very high, health care, while meager by our standards, is universally available, and he will be mourned by the vast majority of the Cuban people when he eventually passes. The fact that he has been able to stand up to the very large 8,000 lb gorilla to the north is something to be amazed at.

So I say Yes, let's end the embargo, open the doors to Cuba and help spread democracy in our own hemisphere, through good example.

[Gregg Pathiakis]

I'm going to preface this post by admitting I am very ignorant of the history of the feud between the US and Cuba except for the missle crisis, but I have to agree that the relationship between the two nations will change after Castro dies. Not sure if someone with the exact same mindset is going to take over, but assuming that isn't the case, the US would be smart to open up relations with Cuba. I was just reading a book (I might be a little off on the title, but it is by Paul Aron, titled More Unsolved Mysteries of American History) and he claims in this book that if it were not for the embargo and current relationship, the relationship between Cuba and the US would be one of the closest between two nations anywhere. OK, on to topics I actually know something about.

[tamu33]

I was just reading a book (I might be a little off on the title, but it is by Paul Aron, titled More Unsolved Mysteries of American History) and he claims in this book that if it were not for the embargo and current relationship, the relationship between Cuba and the US would be one of the closest between two nations anywhere. OK, on to topics I actually know something about.

I wouldn't say closest anywhere but it would be up there. It would probably be somewhat like the way we treat Canada and Mexico. Certainly their economy would boom with open trade to the US. The US would outsource like crazy, just like we did with mexico after NAFTA was created.

It is quite clear that what we know of today as global economic interdependence has dramatically affected the ways in which countries and businesses around the world relate to one another. The challenge of global competition today has caused numerous and profound changes in the environment in which businesses must find their way, and, consequently, the ways in which nation states act and react to each other. As a result, no single country can be immune from the impact of such fundamental change.

On a political map, the boundaries between countries are as clear as ever. But on a competitive map, a map showing the real flows of financial and industrial activity, those boundaries have largely disappeared. *** Through this flow ..., we have become global citizens, and so must the companies that want to sell us things.

Both the risks and benefits associated with global business are very real. This vastly increased importance of transnational business opportunities not only permits, but actually invites, nation states’ efforts to exert influence over them as an extension of foreign policy.

The United States, certainly, has not been hesitant to apply sanctions in order to further its interests. In fact, it has rather liberally used sanctions in this regard. Between 1993 and the present, the US applied sanctions 61 times against 35 countries. This has been a popular option "of choice" for US decision makers. We have often seen them applied as an alternative to military action, as for example, against Iran and Libya for their perceived efforts at supporting terrorism, or against Iraq in an effort to dissuade it from invading Kuwait. As indicated above, however, there is considerable debate as to the effectiveness of sanctions. One study showed that of the 150 examples of sanctions imposed during this century, "... only one in three made even a modest contribution toward the intended goal". Moreover, sanctions are not without economic effect on the country imposing them. They can, in fact, be an "expensive" option. For example, it is estimated that the application of sanctions cost the US in 1995 alone $15 to $19 billion in lost export revenues.

The U.S. trade embargo of Cuba, as an economic extension of U.S. foreign policy, seems not to have been successful. It has not caused Castro to leave office, nor has it forced an abandonment of the communist form of government in Cuba. Moreover, continuation of the embargo does not appear to offer high prospects for success. In fact, by doing so, it seems that the U.S. will likely continue merely to impoverish the Cuban people, alienate its allies and trading partners, and cause its own businesses to be in a poor competitive position when Castro eventually does leave office.

In our opinion, it is time for the U.S. to reconsider its Cold War attitude toward Cuba and to seek to engage it instead.

quoted from http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/cuba2.html

[OAKS]

I just hope I can go in and buy some property if Cuba opens up.

[Sonny]

I don't know. Do you think this lingering relic of a Cold War long since past might have anything to do with a wealthy, politically powerful interest group in Miami, FL? Hmm, I wonder who the governor of Florida is, and if he has any connections higher up in gov't?

It has nothing to do with the Bush family. The dispute with Cuba & Castro goes back over 40 years now. I know that most folks from the left like to blame W. for every ill in the world, but not this one.

[laxfan25]

I don't know. Do you think this lingering relic of a Cold War long since past might have anything to do with a wealthy, politically powerful interest group in Miami, FL? Hmm, I wonder who the governor of Florida is, and if he has any connections higher up in gov't?

It has nothing to do with the Bush family. The dispute with Cuba & Castro goes back over 40 years now. I know that most folks from the left like to blame W. for every ill in the world, but not this one.

I would say that it has a little to do with it, since the administration has not only continued the embargo, but actually added additional restrictions on private travel there. For example, before 2004 Cuban exiles could visit the island once a year to visit relatives and bring back goodies and money. The Bush administration thought this was helping Cuba too much, so now they can only visit once every 3 years, and the amount of money they can bring has also been greatly restricted. The US business community would certainly like to see the embargo lifted.

As one small example of what I was referring to about the influence of the Cuban exile community, I would point to the Elian Gonzales travesty.
While a year old, here is a really interesting update on the Elian story that also explores some of the US/Cuba issues.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5540113

I'm not trying to be an apologist for Castro's crackdowns, but as this article points out, this is the only country that is off-limits to US travelers, and certainly not the only one that doesn't practice full human rights. There are some even closer that allow the government to imprison people for many years, without even charging them with specific crimes, and we're allowed to visit. It is also not implausible that the charges made by the Cuban government that the "free press" they are restricting may have backing from another country. After all, our government isn't above planting stories in other country's newspapers, is it? Given how strongly the extreme right wing hates Castro, it is not inconceiveable that there are other dirty tricks being pulled.
This story line is way to old, and we would serve our interests quicker if we adopted an open policy towards Cuba. I think that a flood of US tourists to Cuba, and vice versa, would be a stronger influence towards an open society than our current policy, which just serves to justify Castro's "paranoia" of America's evil intentions.

[DanGenck]

I don't know. Do you think this lingering relic of a Cold War long since past might have anything to do with a wealthy, politically powerful interest group in Miami, FL? Hmm, I wonder who the governor of Florida is, and if he has any connections higher up in gov't?

It has nothing to do with the Bush family. The dispute with Cuba & Castro goes back over 40 years now. I know that most folks from the left like to blame W. for every ill in the world, but not this one.

Considering Bush's poll numbers, it might be more than the left blaming Bush for problems these days...

[tamu33]

I'm not trying to be an apologist for Castro's crackdowns, but as this article points out, this is the only country that is off-limits to US travelers, and certainly not the only one that doesn't practice full human rights.

To travel to any of these countries one must obtain specific and rarely given permission.
Cuba.
Iran.
Iraq.
Libya.
North Korea.
Serbia.
Sudan.

[CATLAX MAN]

I read today that there is a movement to get Cuba into the WBC if they agree to contribute their earnings from their participation to Hurricane Relief efforts. The Bush administration objected to Cuba's participation because they were going to financially profit from their participation, which was a technical infraction of the age-old embargo. This apparently is a way around this. Cuba is reportedly receptive to this as they did not care about the financial impact of their participation.

[tamu33]

This is a weird situation. If the US allows the Cubans to play and then takes their money it is like they are paying us to allow them to play. Who's to say that is not trade? Plus what guarantee does the US have that they will donate all the monies in question. There might be too many "ifs" surrounding this situation for the US to bow out. Plus, what kind of ramifications would occur if a loop hole is found for the embargo.