« Bush Talks Cuba Democracy on Eve of Trip | Main | Radio Mambi Commentator Dies »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The same tired line of 50 years. I can't believe Romney has fallen for the cuban-american policy trap. how can people repeat the same nonsense rhetoric for years and years.

He just lost my vote.

And with the oil that will be developed off cuban shores, looks like another 50 years.

Mambi Watch

No big surprise here. Actually, it seems that Romney's campaign is the creation of Jeb Bush, and Florida Republicans. Check out last months news from the AP:


Romney will no doubt obey every word that the Cuban-American political leadership says. He's basically Florida Republicans' Frankenstein.


Now we know who NOT to vote for. Mitt, you just failed a very important foreign policy test.

Manuel A. Tellechea

Romney is not going anywhere. But his support is nonetheless appreciated. If an embargo really existed anymore his support might really mean something.


Manuel you have no shame. Many c-americans love to be pandered to.

I guess they'll love another 50 years of pandering too.


You know, I REALLY do think that the embargo has not been as effective as it should be. You know why? Because it has not been TIGHT enough. Too many people travel to Cuba and send money to Cuba and the U.S. allows too many Cubans to come in. Had that IDIOT Jimmy Carter not taken in the Marielitos, those desperate Cubans would have toppled the Castro regime but these waves of immigration from the island release the pressure on the Castro regime and allow it to continue repressing its citizens. Anyways, THE EMBARGO SHOULD CONTINUE AND THE RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE WITH CUBA SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE ENFORCED!!!!


Mambi Watch

Don't contradict yourself. Should the current restrictions be enforced, or should more regulations and restrictions be applied?

Should an actual naval blockade be used?

I think the US knows well that it has reached the limits of a failed policy. It can increase its aggression towards Cuba and face unprecedented international condemnation, or begin negotiations and peaceful transition.

After so many decades, and a forthcoming historical chapter, eyes are gonna be on US policy soon.


Let me clarify my statement. YES, more regulations and restrictions should be applied. The embargo has waned over the years. It needs to be FIRM and more restrictions need to be applied. As I said before, CUBA is a terrorist state and the US needs to act accordingly.

"Iran and Cuba can bring the US to its knees"
~Fidel Castro in May of 2001 in Tehran, Iran


Ric - The embargo is a FAILURE. That is a fact. It is also a stain on U.S. foreign policy and an example on how not to use sanctions to stimulate change. Furthermore, the majority of the people do not support the embargo, only you hardliners which you bought with your political dollars and votes. How does it feel to support a policy that makes the situation of your fellow Cubans worse. Bad enough they have to deal with Castro's repression. You see you don't realize you are a community divided against itself. Castro wins.

Cuba may be a disgraceful mess of a country with its political system, but a terrorist state? What did you and John Bolton go to the same college? Are you of the Dick Cheney school of government, lets alter the intelligence landscape to have it suit our policy rather than deal in the truth? I do not see Cuba behaving like the islamofascists or inciting attacks upon on our country.

On September 11, 2001, Cuba was among the first of nations to offer the United States medical and humanitarian assistance after the horrific attacks in NY and Washington DC. That is a fact. That it came from Fidel Castro, well, we politely declined the offer.

Lets be clear, calling Cuba a terrorist state serves a political purpose but is not the truth. If they were indeed a terrorist state, the pretext for our country to militarily invade them would have been established as we would not tolerate such a "terrorist" neighbor on our doorstep.
Even Secretary of State Condelezza Rice has stated publicly that we do not consider Cuba a threat that we would take military action against them.

I think the one thing everyone agrees with is that change is needed Cuba. The issue is how to achieve that. The embargo and status quo is definitely not the way.


Another reason why Gov. Romney will not be President? - Pandering.

Is there any Presidential candidate intelligent enough to offer leadership on this issue and not BS that the hardliners want?

Notice how Gov Romney will not do anything but maintain the status quo. Gracias por nada -


I really like your comments usambcuba. You seem to be pretty straight forward and easy to comprehend about the issues Cuba faces today. Like I've said before, the embargo is a complete failure and needs to be lifted and travel restrictions need to be restored.


changui - thank you for your comments. I enjoy this debate very much as I do love you Cuban Americans, Cubans, and your beautiful island. I also want the changes that we talk about. But the current policy is a failure, hollow, and the way to no changes.


To unambcuba:

Fine, the embargo has failed. However, that does not mean that it needs to be removed but rather it needs to BE A REAL EMBARGO where nothing from the U.S. can get to the island. Not money, not tourists, not students, not education, NOT ANYTHING. Had this been the case, the Castro regime would have fallen years ago. But U.S. dollans and tourism keep SEEPING into the island and the fact that the pressure in Cuba is relased by the massive waves of immigration further contibute to why Castro is in power.

Regarding Cuba as a terrorist state, you are WRONG. I love how you glossed over Fidel's statement in Iran. Does that not show that the Castro regime is terrorist and has Anti-US stances? Year after year, when the U.S. State Department releases its list of terrorist nations, Cuba is consistently on the list. Cuba offered help to the U.S. during the 9/11 attack. Oh how nice of them! The Castro regime has ALWAYS wished to see the demise of the Yanquis and the offering was CLEARLY a PC move. The people of Cuba live in subhuman conditions, have no toilet paper, running water, clothes, shoes, medicines, or even food. So lets break through the thin veneer of Castro's propaganda and see the REALITY; Cuba may have had to means to give the US aid but it would have been aid that the goverment has been taking away from its people and at the expense of the people of Cuba.
Let us not forget the the "Red Avispa" Cuban spies in the U.S. The Castro regime funded terrorism in Angola, in Nicaragua (Sandinistas) in Ireland (Irish Republican Army), in Spain (ETA), in Colombia (FARC). So please do not tell me that Cuba not a terrorist state. It clearly is. Furthermore, Cuba provided refuge for terrorists and murders such as Ieng Sary, responsible for more than 2 million assasinations in Cambodia. The FBI has realsed a list which states that Cuba is providing refuge for at least 77 fugitives of the North American justice system. I can go on, but i won't. Cuba is an Anti-US, TERRORIST state. PERIOD!


Ric- if you admit the embargo is a failure, then you agree it should end.

Your idea of a dream embargo is that, a fantasy. It will never work. You cannot stop what connections are going on between the two Cuban communities, here and on the island. You will never get families to disconnect from each other. In addition you should read books on diplomacy and foreign policy and you will learn that sanctions are among the least effective methods to deal with adversaries. Why? Because you need 100 percent sign-on from all other nations. The UN General Assembly has voted overwhelmingly against our maintaining the embargo on Cuba time and time again. We embarass ourselves as a country maintaining this insane policy.

We also have a law called the Cuban Adjustment Act, which you or someone you know has benefited from. This law is a powerful magnet to draw Cuban emigres to our country. No other immigrant group enjoys the benefits of such a law. And I do not see the pro-embargo crowd calling for its repeal.

Castro is indeed the propagandist you describe. But you keep missing the point. We give him the soapbox to stand on and maintain his repression with our policies. Of course he is anti-American government. He is a communist. He is afraid of every great thing we have to offer as a nation as well as the free market of ideas and goods. Because his 50 year socioeconomic experiment is a failure, it will not survive him when he dies. Cuba will ultimately change. But we have put ourselves as a nation and community on the sidelines, highly ineffectual in doing anything to influence change. The vacuum we created is now filled by Venezuela and China, who are now Cuba's benefactors and largest trading partners.

But the terrorist list you refer to became a political tool over the years, not based always upon objective criteria or reliable data.

Regarding the spies, Cuban 5, and U.S. fugitives in Cuba, I would like to see us exchange those 5 Cuban nationals we are holding here for in exchange for all U.S. fugitives hiding in Cuba and the freedom of all several hundred Cuban political prisoners languishing in Castro's jails.


For mi amigo Ric - fixated that Cuba is a terrorist state, here are some facts. Read and think with your brain please and be human enough to admit where you may be mistaken -

Posted on Fri, Mar. 16, 2007
http://www.miamiherald.com/851/ story/43180. html

Cuba -- How scared should we be?

According to a defector, Cuba has a secret, underground laboratory
southeast of Havana called ''Labor Uno,'' where biological agents --
''viruses and bacteria and dangerous sicknesses'' -- are being
developed for military use.

The administration calls Cuba a ''state sponsor of terrorism,'' so if
the defector's story is true, Cuba would represent what President
Bush terms one of the worst national security threats of the 21st
century: the world's most dangerous weapons in the hands of the
world's most dangerous people.

How scared should we be?

Not scared at all, if we judge by the administration' s policies and
public statements, none of which betray concern, much less certainty,
about any threat emanating from Cuba.

The defector, Roberto Ortega, was Cuba's top military doctor. He
visited Labor Uno in 1992 while he was escorting a visiting Russian

Ortega may be entirely truthful, but the Iraq experience teaches that
fragments of interesting information do not amount to ''slam-dunk' '

Indeed, the Iraq intelligence failure led U.S. agencies to reassess
their views on weapons programs worldwide. The result came in August
2005 when, with Ortega's account in hand, these agencies downgraded
their Cuba assessment, concluding unanimously that it was ``unclear
whether Cuba has an active offensive biological-warfare effort now,
or even had one in the past.''

But the administration gives us more reasons to sleep easy.

• Cuba missed the ``axis of evil.'' With the exception of
now-departed John Bolton, senior officials responsible for security
matters have been silent about Cuba. In October 2005, Bolton's
successor as the State Department's top security official, Robert
Joseph, did not mention Cuba in a global survey of weapons of mass
destruction issues. Cabinet-level officials routinely chide Cuba's
human rights abuses but mention no security concerns.

• Ana Montes unchallenged. After Cuban spy Ana Montes was discovered
to be working as the administration' s top Cuba defense-intelligenc e
analyst in 2001, Bolton and other officials charged that she had
skewed U.S. intelligence, including a famous 1998 report that called
Cuba's military capabilities ''residual'' and ''defensive' ' and its
threat ''negligible. '' But in six years, the administration has
issued no report offering a less benign assessment, even though it
would serve its political interests to do so. Montes' betrayal, we
can deduce, involved leaking the identities of agents and other U.S.
secrets to Cuba rather than distorting U.S. intelligence.

• Migration exception. If the administration had the slightest
concern about terrorism coming from Cuba, it would not have a unique,
open-door policy toward undocumented Cuban migrants, where we welcome
those who reach our shores or Mexican border crossings and release
them into the community within hours. This may make humanitarian
sense, but it is truly a pre-9/11 policy in a post-9/11 world. It
tells Cuba, if indeed it is a terrorist state, to infiltrate
operatives not through cloak-and-dagger ruses but mixed in with
everyday migrants.

• No negotiations. In return for a promise to cap its nuclear
program, North Korea will receive fuel oil and direct talks with
Washington that could lead to normalized relations. Similarly, Iran
has been offered rewards for ending its nuclear ambitions. In the
Cuban case, the administration seeks no talks and does not pursue
Ortega's recommendation that international inspectors go to Cuba.
Apparently, the administration sees nothing to talk about.

What we are left with is that the only visible U.S. action in
response to a Cuba-related security issue is a maritime exercise to
prepare for a possible migration crisis in the Florida Straits.

Floridians can therefore go back to worrying about hurricanes,
tornadoes and inadequate insurance coverage -- until, that is, Raúl
Castro figures out that a new weapons program might be the ticket to
achieve normal relations with the United States.

Philip Peters is vice president of the Lexington Institute in
Arlington, Va.

Comment - Peters points out the hypocrisy on the migration issue very well. Hypothetically if there were no Cuban Adjustment Act in place and any Cuban emigre understood that they could be deported if they entered the U.S. illegally just as applies to any other foreign alien seeking entry into the U.S., there may not be the massive immigration flood concern upon Castro's passing. Would the U.S. ever allow a massive migration from a "terrorist" state? Heck we are not even letting Iraqis who helped our soldiers get a pass into the U.S.



This is all very nice. But if you read my statement, I NEVER mentioned a think about biological warfare. I mentioned that Cuba harbors terrorists and fugitives not only from the north american justice system but from other places of the world as well (i.e. Spain, Cambodia, etc.) Are you going to deny that Castro played no role in Nicaragua, Colombia and Spain just to name a few? Come on now, everyone knows that. I'd also like to point out that the Castrol regime PULVERIZED the Brother's to the Rescue planes 10 years ago. If shooting down those humanitarian planes isn't terrorist, I don't know what is. People say "Cuban police have sticks in their hands, not guns, there are no weapons in Cuba." So what do you call those Russian MIG's then?


Ric - Cuba does harbor fugitives. Many are from the U.S. I would love to see Cuba return those fugitives to us to face justice and their day in court here. But we do not negotiate with Cuba. The other foreign fugitives, well those countries should negotiate with Cuba to have them returned. That is part of what diplomacy is for. We have none with Cuba.

And we do not have unclean hands on this issue either. We harbor people like Posada Cariles, who has openly admitted to being involved in bombings in Havana and involvement with the downing of an airplane with innocent people on board.

The Brothers to the Rescue was indeed a tragedy for both our country and Cuba, and especially the widows and relatives of the deceased pilots. That said, those men should have never flown into Cuban airspace, humanitarian or whatever reason and seek to provoke an international incident. It only resulted in the loss of lives and tried to bring our country into military conflict with Cuba. Its kind of like the person who knows behind a door that has a sign warning you not to enter without permission, that there is vicious dog that will bite you inside but sticks their hand in the door or tries to enter anyway.

Cuba was also wrong and foolish to have shot down those planes. It hurt their presence in the world community and set back whatever progress had been made in establishing a dialogue between our two countries.

I believe it served a mutual political purpose though. It was an important event that served both Castro and the hardliners here in the U.S. President Clinton was going to veto the Helms Burton Act, which by far is one of the worst legislative acts passed by Congress. However, the Brothers to Rescue incident occurred and of course, President Clinton changed his position and signed the legislation into law. The hardliners got what they wanted, a law that codified the embargo and tied the hands of the Executive branch. It also helped alienate our country with the world community by dictating how they should conduct foreign policy with Cuba if they want to have good relations with the U.S.

Castro got what he wanted too, because he got to use our U.S. policies one more time to defend his repression again.

You see Ric, I believe people like you actually support Castro despite your protestations to the contrary, because you support policies like the embargo, something that has only served Castro's ends all too well.


Out of the three Brothers to the Rescue planes that went out on a mission that day the two that DID NOT cross into Cuban airspace were the ones that were shot down. So I think that the Castro regime was only too eager to shoot down those planes. Why weren't those planes given a warning? I mean one plane entered the airspace for a brief moment, left the airspace back into international waters and then the Cuban MIGs shot down the two planes that did not cross the airspace and it shot them over international waters. The think the Castro regime is completely to blame and is a further testament of the terrorist nature of the regime. How are you going to shoot down two helpless propeller planes on a humanitarian mission? They were not spy planes nor planes with weapons.

Regardless of what you or I say, it is ultimately the President of the United States that will determine the policy towards Cuba. As Bush said "The US will have no relations with Cuba until human rights are respected for all on the island."
I think that that is the correct approach to take because this country does not negotiate with terrorists nor with terrorist nations. You end the embargo, then what? I mean remember that right when Castro took power he expropriated all the US corporations and basically wiped out any symbol of capitalism on the island. If the embargo ends and American products and ideas enter the island, you think that will allow people to see what freedom is and thus topple the regime? Oh please! Who is to say that the Castro regime wouldn't SENSOR what gets into the island. The shipments of books about democracy for example might get tossed into the ocean and the American TV channels might be blocked by the Cuban government.
Nevertheless, I am totally for setting up a committee composed of American polititians, Cuban-American exiles (they also have a right and a say as to what goes on in Cuba-remember that Jose Marti, Cuba's national hero, spent more time in exile that in Cuba) and Cubans on the island such as Farinas or Lage and Alarcon in which the future of Cuba will be decided.


Hey guys,easy,easy....New governor of Florida...statement...GGGAAAARRR,RAISE THE SAILS,DOWN WITH FIDEL,GGARRRRR,TIGHTEN THE HATCHES,I LOVE THE CUBAN PEOPLE!!!.."Hey Joe (jose)you think they bought it"? What do you expect..Love debates but not the groundhog kind..Every day the same meal,hungry or not,you get tired.What Miami wants,it gets..Except when it comes to Cuba.They want it back..Deal the cards and get that black guy out of here. With every question regarding Cuba,we come back with the same answer..starting with the bay of pigs. this and that and when i was and now im not bla,bla..Action!!!!NO EMBARGO,NO PROBLEM!!


Oh,and by the way...Have you hugged a balsero today??? For christ sake,help them,dont just trow them to the Catholic Charities.....dont just give them to the U.S. GOVT.for a handout that NO CUBAN ORGANIZATION OFFERS....I got angry again...solly

The comments to this entry are closed.

About MiamiHerald.com | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | Copyright | About the McClatchy Company