For a third world country like Iran, Cuba, venezuela, etc.. the question always become what is better: An independent brutal dictatorship, a US puppet (lets face it, no country is immune, ex. thanks to Chavez, he has united south America ending US brutal influence), or a democracy (is it even possible when a small group of rich Americans and corps easily influence it the way they influence the US politics)?
In that sense, it is a tough question as one possibly imagine what Cuba could be like today without the dictator Castro. Would US and foreign companies have owned Cuba? Could it have been democracy? Now that South America is getting united and finally getting rid of the imperialism, thanks to what happened to Argentina and Chavez paying a good portion of Argentina's debt off, is a Cuba owned by Cubans in a better shape in the near and far future having a say over its own.
What do you think?
Maybe this post should be a separate thread on dictatorship and its advantage/disadvantages.
In that sense, it is a tough question as one possibly imagine what Cuba could be like today without the dictator Castro. Would US and foreign companies have owned Cuba? Could it have been democracy? Now that South America is getting united and finally getting rid of the imperialism, thanks to what happened to Argentina and Chavez paying a good portion of Argentina's debt off, is a Cuba owned by Cubans in a better shape in the near and far future having a say over its own.
What do you think?
Maybe this post should be a separate thread on dictatorship and its advantage/disadvantages.
In all cases and always the answer is that freedom is best. This is God's law and it is the only self consistent rule. Now within a practical frame work one works towards this direction. There is nothing inherently good about an independent nation. A nation is for its people. Why should any individual give up his long-term welfare for the benefit of a name, say Cuba, Iran, Islam, or Jewry, or history, and such fictitious gods?
What a tyrant such as Castro or the disgusting Khamenei or AN, or even aspiring tyrants such as Bush for example do is to set up false dichotomies. You must obey me or be ruled by the evil US. You are either with us or against us. Nonsense. It is just that debunking such dichotomy to get freedom requires true conviction. A true conviction that enables much striving (Arabic jahaad, Persian kooshesh) and intelligent steadfast preparation and planning. However, most people prefer to be slaves to various gods. For those who choose to be free, the scheming of tyrants is childish and weak; they are always losers in the long-run. The tyrannical schemings of the US, Israel, Russia, or the IR for example are weak.
What a tyrant such as Castro or the disgusting Khamenei or AN, or even aspiring tyrants such as Bush for example do is to set up false dichotomies. You must obey me or be ruled by the evil US. You are either with us or against us. Nonsense. It is just that debunking such dichotomy to get freedom requires true conviction. A true conviction that enables much striving (Arabic jahaad, Persian kooshesh) and intelligent steadfast preparation and planning. However, most people prefer to be slaves to various gods. For those who choose to be free, the scheming of tyrants is childish and weak; they are always losers in the long-run. The tyrannical schemings of the US, Israel, Russia, or the IR for example are weak.
SO when will Khamenei retire as leader of Iran, arent they about the same age?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/02/19/castro/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/02/19/castro/index.html
You will not be happy with any US president. If you want the chief executive of the country to come out and, to make you happy, say what a horrible country this is and start apologizing to the world, you'll be waiting a long time. It is not gonna happen. Just listen to Obama, of all people. For now your only solace is to listen to speeches of Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Sheikh Nasrallah and Castro.
Well, I think it's a little unfair for us to judge what Castro did. Having talked to many Cubans about him, you'd be surprised to know that the majority of Cubans viewed him as a hero ending feudalism which they say was much worse than the situation even at the end of Castro's rein. Don't forget that the Cubans were getting billions in subsidies from the Soviet Union and that times were "not bad at all" until the collapse of communism there. The situation had deteriorated since, and Castro lost a lot of support not only for holding on to and insisting on a failing system, but tightening his grip and state control on the people. Without doubt, he did over stay his welcome by a few years.
On the issue of handing power to his brother, there really isn'y anyone better to fill the current vaccum. Raul is not just Castor's brother, but he was one of the leading figures in the Cuban revolution and head of one of the strongest and most organized armies in the world. He was the mastermind behind defeating the S. Africans in Angola. He does favor change and loosening state control in small businesses in the 90's was one of his initiatives. I think he is just the right combination of old school (still favored by the older generation who lived during the feudalist Cuba) and the new generation of Cubans who want more freedom and an improved economy.
I think as a sign of respect for his brother (misplaced or not), his initiatives will be slow until Fidel passes away, but we should expect a lot of change in Cuba in the next 10 years.
On the issue of handing power to his brother, there really isn'y anyone better to fill the current vaccum. Raul is not just Castor's brother, but he was one of the leading figures in the Cuban revolution and head of one of the strongest and most organized armies in the world. He was the mastermind behind defeating the S. Africans in Angola. He does favor change and loosening state control in small businesses in the 90's was one of his initiatives. I think he is just the right combination of old school (still favored by the older generation who lived during the feudalist Cuba) and the new generation of Cubans who want more freedom and an improved economy.
I think as a sign of respect for his brother (misplaced or not), his initiatives will be slow until Fidel passes away, but we should expect a lot of change in Cuba in the next 10 years.
There is no doubt that democracy is the best, but can it work in countries like Iran, Venezuela, etc.. where the US will be there influencing it their way. Venezuela is a great example where US has tried using all methods including a coup to get rid of Chavez and place a government in there serving the US and the small group of rich corrupted Venezuelans. These acts cause a group to have to become dictatorial in order to survive and stop the looting of their country by the US. (We cant include Iran in this list as its own government does the looting)
So, it is not so black and white.
So, it is not so black and white.
F.P jAn,
I heard some one was holding the Pen in Fidel's hand while he was signing the resignation......:--biggrin
It seems to me that supporters of leftist dictators never give a dime about the WILL of people being governed under these tyrants.
The guy in Syria appoints his Son as President before passing on, another one is kicking the bucket in Cuba and appoints his brother as President. Some one needs to tell these people that you are abusing the terminology, President are supposed to elected by people. I would have more respect for them if they were honest and call themselves the Supreme Ruler or Leader which is well accepted in countries with dictatorial regimes in charge.
I heard some one was holding the Pen in Fidel's hand while he was signing the resignation......:--biggrin
It seems to me that supporters of leftist dictators never give a dime about the WILL of people being governed under these tyrants.
The guy in Syria appoints his Son as President before passing on, another one is kicking the bucket in Cuba and appoints his brother as President. Some one needs to tell these people that you are abusing the terminology, President are supposed to elected by people. I would have more respect for them if they were honest and call themselves the Supreme Ruler or Leader which is well accepted in countries with dictatorial regimes in charge.
LOL, Motori jaan, that is even better than my shaash analogy. Yes same old same old. Hell Chavez tried it too. He may yet not be done. Whenever you hear someone coming to you claiming loudly to be fadaaye` khalgh shut the door. Cause he is really coming to take over your house, stay for ever, and imprison you in the closet if you refuse to serve him.
Perfect, you just made the case for every dictator in the world. They all have some reason to kill their people. As for US looting the country? What world, and what year, do you live in? Every time there is an earthquake, flood, famine or fire in the world the first to show up at the scene are the Navy ships. I didn't see Cuba helping out. If you want to know the truth the world is costing the US. It is not the other way around. What are we getting for free? Who is paying those $100 a barrel of oil? May be the better thing to do is to go and just take the oil. What would you call them then? Looters?
Indeed. When I see Castro, and by extension, Chavez and Ahmadinejad are being rationalized because US is "looting" their country, I speak up. If Cuba was so great, the rest of the Caribbean would have been like them. Exactly what the US is looting from the Bahamas and Jamaica and why haven't their government been "forced" to kill their people? Precisely that kind of talk 30 years ago brought us to where we are now. Language like US "puppet was hurled at the Shah by the left and alike. Fine, live with this non- US puppet ta halet ja biad.