Should USA invade and conquer Cuba?

Question

That old rat Castro is living to long and i am sick of him and his anti-american rhetoric. He is a real a threat and is breeding commies to invade us and sabotage us. the Cuban exiles here want him gone. He oppresses his people. He was supposed to free them from the old regime but after 50 years he is still a dictator.
Why not just crush him and free his people? it would be good for business too. He once had weapons of mass destruction atomic missleds pointed at us. Who is to say he will not do that again?
I say kill the commie bastard and throw out his regime and insititute a free democracy for those poor people overt here just 90 miles from USA. Drop a couple of bunker bombs on his palace.
He is a much bigger threat than Iraq and that Osama Arab guy.

PHd. MIKE. hey dude i am only joking for chrisakes. i am trying to make a point.
I am pointing outt he absurdity of the presnt pretexts for the invasion of IRAQ and the murder of innocent civilians when we attacked Bahgdad on TV and everybody cheered. it was sickening. the right-wingers have stolen our government and are using it in criminal enterprises.

Answer 1

Anti-american he is! And so are billions of other people that are sick and tired of american imperial interventions in their countries. The only threat to america is the current fascists and unthinking robtic reactionaries like yourself that are a real danger. You have been spoon fed a false image of what this country really is. Castro does not nearly have as much blood on his hands as the rulers of this country have. Do you remember the genocide in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos (3 million dead). What about Chile and Guatemala? 40,000 and over 200,000 dead respectively.

Your rhetoric on this question exposes your ignorance and i surely would hate to have your ideology and beliefs. You make it seem as if you care about poor people. You said " kill the commie bastard and throw out his regime and insititute a free democracy for those poor people over [there] just 90 miles from USA". Well, the US has been toppling government to supposedly establish democracies. Some examples are Guatemala in 1954 and Iran in 1953. These were democratic goverments the the US toppled. In their place the US installed BRUTAL dictators that make Fidel Castro look like kindergarden Bully! Its as a result of the intervention in Iran in 1953 that today we have the problem we have today with that country, which by my standards has the moral and legal right under international law to defend itself.

I will finish off here with a qoute from Geogre Orwells book 1984. A book applicable to the brutal regimes of Stalin, Hitler, and to this one! It is a qoute that perfectly describes drones like you!

"Parsons was Winston's fellow employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralyzing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms—one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the thought police, the stability of the Party depended." —pg 22

Mike
International Relations Ph. D
Stanford Univeristy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

A response to RANDY's posting:

Rany behind your eloquent words is really a sense od misunderstanding of the whole problem with "terrorism". You are wrong onmany points and i will focus on 2 of them.

1) You stated: "The United States has been attacked multiple times by terrorists with increasing intensity. It is the job of the federal government to ensure that such attacks come to an end."

*You imply here that the US is the victim and that it needs to carry out its wars in Iraq & Afganistan both as a response to 911 (& other attacks) and as a way to prevent such attacks in the future. This is wrong. Attacking other countries will only inflames tensions and create more "terrorism". My claim is back by a CIA report to the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee last year in which the CIA itself has said that the war in Iraq has increased anymosity toward the US & increased the number of terror attack worldwide. In addtion, you have to realize that is was the US that created this problem in the first place. Starting in 1953 with the over throw of DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh to install a BRUTAL dictator that killed, raped, and torutred Iranians. ALL IRAINIANS REMEMBER THIS.
the way to end terrorism is to get out of Iraq & Afganistan now and stop meedling in other countries affairs!

2) You WRONGFULLY state: "It has proceeded down this path with restraint. While other cultures have a moral foundation that allows, even dictates, targeting civilians, the United States doesn’t."

*Where have you been these last few years? Does your televsion only get FOX news? Do you only read the Weekly Srandard? My God!!!! Have you not heard about what happened in Haditha??? What about Abu Griab??? What about Islamyia??
Restraint??? In Hadita, INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN WERE DRAGGED FROM THEIR HOMES AND SHOT IN COLD BLOOD!!! YOU CALL THIS RESTRAINT!!! You call dropping 5,000 pound bombs in city centers restraint!!!! Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of American bombing. True there are sectarian attacks but most of the civilian death have come at the hands of the US. Why do we even have a war there??? We supplied Saddam with WMD's in the 1980's. We trained his Army in the School of the Americas at Fort Benning Georgia. We sold him arms. Then we attack him for having those weapons we gave him!! If you somehwo justify this war what twitsted and blind logic you have!!!! Sad very sad.

The United has ALWAYS tartgeted civilians. Both directly and indirectly; ex. El Salvador, Nicaragua, Chile, Iraq, Iran, Democratic repulic of Congo (rest in peace Patrice Lummumba)

wake up!!!!

Answer 2

As your question demonstrates, satire and irony are difficult to write so that all understand the point you are attempting to make. It would have been easier to simply address the Iraq situation.

Clearly people differ as to whether the Allies (led by the United States) should have invaded Iraq. While it may be difficult to find common ground, some things are not disputable. The United States has been attacked multiple times by terrorists with increasing intensity. It is the job of the federal government to ensure that such attacks come to an end. It has proceeded down this path with restraint. It would have been easy for the United States to turn the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan to glass and to do the same with Baghdad. While other cultures have a moral foundation that allows, even dictates, targeting civilians, the United States doesn’t. As control of weapons has become better, the United States has increasingly attempted to decrease even collateral deaths of civilians.

That said, the world continues to decrease in size and cultures can easily become abrasive to each other. The United States can attempt to withdraw from the world and look the other way as nations become increasingly aggressive (internally as well as externally), however, that has been tried in the past (such as between world war I and world war II) and didn’t work then and certainly won’t work now.

Answer 3

Invasion.....aggression. Can your neighbors take your house and property over if they think you are a jerk? Fortunately, NO.

We get nowhere with aggression, i.e., BRAUN....where are the BRAINS in the equation???? Only Condoleza Rice seems to display any!

Answer 4

You can't ram democracy down peoples throats at the point of a gun. It isn't working very well in the middle east. They have to want it for themselves. If they really wanted him out, he'd be out.

Answer 5

I would rather take over Canada.

Answer 6

It didn't work before, did it? It's a waste of time and money.