[Brazelton] Fidel Castro

GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Dave said:
Won't know until we try, though will we? I mean, the stuff we've been trying hasn't helped at all. Maybe it's time to try something different.
Click to expand...
Ah, going to the "Slickback method of bitch smacking for results" are we?

 
Eriol

Eriol

MindDetective said:
How else are you going to sneak in some capitalism?
Click to expand...
And all the bad aspects of cronyism with it? I would only say that Capitalism != Democracy, nor do either of those necessarily lead to an improvement of people's lives and/or freedom. See Russia for a good example of such for BOTH, or perhaps Egypt post-Mubarak pre-Military Coup, with them VOTING IN the Muslim Brotherhood and the "interesting" results for human rights I'm sure that would have had.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Way to cherry pick one part of one sentence from an entire post and use it as a basis for your argument.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Dave said:
Way to cherry pick one part of one sentence from an entire post and use it as a basis for your argument.
Click to expand...
If you're referring to me, I used the entire post.

Just because "what we're doing hasn't been working" doesn't mean bad idea B will work, and that its untried nature is not necessarily a merit.

"You've tried NOT hitting the bitch, how has that been working for you? Maybe it's time to try something different."
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
GasBandit said:
If you're referring to me, I used the entire post.

Just because "what we're doing hasn't been working" doesn't mean bad idea B will work, and that its untried nature is not necessarily a merit.

"You've tried NOT hitting the bitch, how has that been working for you? Maybe it's time to try something different."
Click to expand...
No, not you. @stienman.
 
strawman

strawman

Dave said:
Way to cherry pick one part of one sentence from an entire post and use it as a basis for your argument.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll bite. Help me understand how "not exactly pro-democratic" is intended to be understood in context:

Dave said:
Well, the US is already starting to relax restrictions. Under Castro II, Electric Boogaloo, things have been steadily improving. They've loosened the noose, so to speak. It's not anywhere near where we would like it to be and Obama and Raul sparred on this back in March. But Raul is nearing the end of his tenure as well and while not exactly pro-democratic, the future of Cuba is in the hands of more progressive people. I think that actively working with them to alleviate some of the economic pain would help them along and make it better for their people.
Click to expand...
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
stienman said:
Ok, I'll bite. Help me understand how "not exactly pro-democratic" is intended to be understood in context:
Click to expand...
It's directly addressing the changing climate in Cuba from a purely Communist one to a more open society with eased restrictions on the populace. It's looking at how the place is improving and will continue to improve with more progressives as the old ways die out. By saying it's not exactly pro-democratic it's looking at how difficult the transition might be and how we need to nurture said progressives. The hard-line we've taken in the past did nothing productive. Easing restrictions while keeping an eye on human rights abuses can go a long way to helping the people of Cuba.
 
strawman

strawman

By saying "it's not exactly pro-democratic" you're suggesting that's it's very nearly pro democratic, and only differs technically or in some other small, inconsequential way.

The only way it can mean what you're suggesting is it you are saying it very, very sarcastically - essentially mocking your main argument.

If you're saying it honestly then you are using words in combinations that don't convey the intended meaning.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Yes, because one line of ironic text negates the remainder of the argument, no matter how serious. Like suddenly entire paragraphs are written ironically by association.
 
Denbrought

Denbrought

Spain maintaining diplomatic (and commercial) ties with Cuba did jack shit to hasten democracy along.

The U.S. 1950's (and beyond) propping up of the spanish dictatorship did jack shit to hasten democracy.

Don't overstate what you can do.
 
Siska

Siska

The nicest thing I can say about Castro is that he wasn't as bad as some other dictators (Like Batista, hah) and he didn't seem to be self indulgent, so not a total hypocrite. He was still a power hungry, paranoid dictator who oppressed anyone who disagreed with him. I hope restrictions on and in Cuba continues to ease up.

Also, Ima lefty left left (that voted green party in Sweden) but the US green party is an impotent shitstorm as full of grifters as the the republican party. They are not getting my support any time soon.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Dave said:
Yes, because one line of ironic text negates the remainder of the argument, no matter how serious. Like suddenly entire paragraphs are written ironically by association.
Click to expand...
I think this was ultimately something similar to "couldn't care less" or "literally" where the understood meaning turned out different from the intended meaning due to the words' actual meaning being different than the common understanding of those words.
And then of course that gap widened in over the subsequent conversation.

--Patrick
 
JCM

JCM

Funny thing, I've been to Cuba, and a month later, as I was jumping around pre-American Independence Havana in Assassin's Creed IV, I couldn't see any difference but the lack of old cars and ugly wiring, and no building lookied clean or was free of moss, cracks and soot.

Castro is a great example of how religion or ideology can destroy a country, another being post-Taliban Afghanistan or today's Venezuela.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top