Are the exiled Cubans going to get their land back

[DaBoz]

Is that part of Obamas deal with the Communist in Cuba?

[sweetwater5s9]

Several laws control the embargo. Among the most recent is the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act (codified in Chapter 69 of Title 22, U.S. Code). Section 6005 of the law outlines sanctions imposed against Cuba – the qualified blockade, prohibition on some financial transactions, and limitation on remittances.

But then there is Section 6007, the waiver provision. This tells us that, while it is true that it would require an act of Congress to repeal the restrictions on Cuba, no legislation is necessary to ignore the restrictions. The act empowers the president to do that on his own. All he needs to do is represent to Congress that the Cuban government

 
(1) has held free and fair elections conducted under internationally recognized observers;
(2) has permitted opposition parties ample time to organize and campaign for such elections, and has permitted full access to the media to all candidates in the elections;
(3) is showing respect for the basic civil liberties and human rights of the citizens of Cuba;
(4) is moving toward establishing a free market economic system; and
(5) has committed itself to constitutional change that would ensure regular free and fair elections that meet the requirements of paragraph (2).

 
Similarly, Section 6006 enables the president to provide humanitarian aid (food, medicine, and medical supplies) to Cuba … provided he represents to Congress that the Cuban government

 
(1) has made a public commitment to hold free and fair elections for a new government within 6 months and is proceeding to implement that decision;
(2) has made a public commitment to respect, and is respecting, internationally recognized human rights and basic democratic freedoms; and
(3) is not providing weapons or funds to any group, in any other country, that seeks the violent overthrow of the government of that country.

 
In other words, it has been American policy for decades – the policy Obama says does not “work” – that the United States may and should provide significant aid as long as Cuba, in return, stops terrorizing its citizens, respects basic human and civil rights, respects democratic freedoms, refrains from arming terrorists and insurrectionists, liberalizes its economy, establishes a free press, and lays the groundwork for free and fair elections.

So, if that hasn’t “worked” to encourage Cuban reform, what is the president suggesting will “work”? Giving Cuba aid and legitimacy without requiring the regime to change? Why would we want to give an American taxpayer dime to, or help legitimize in any way, a regime that rejects these basic elements of a civilized society?

And has it occurred to the media and the president’s other apologists that American law and policy have not relentlessly mandated a blockade on and isolation of Cuba for all these years? All that had to happen to eliminate the restrictions, without any congressional action, was a halt to the persecution of the Cuban people by the Castro dictatorship.

The blockade is still in place because the Castro regime will not change and therefore Obama cannot make the required representations.
So, since the dictator will not change, what will “work” is for us to change? What will “work” is to give the dictator the recognition, the legitimacy, the aid, and the trade money in exchange for no reforms?


Why worry … just two more years of this, right?



What part of keeping Cuba isolated “hasn’t worked”?

[Baretta19]

Kind of interesting that after a 10 minute speech from the Anointed One everyone seems to think that Cuba is welcoming America with open arms, all I can tell is 2 leaders just had a conversation and are open to starting a dialog. The other curios outcome has been all the chatter about torture and here we see the vast majority of Democrats fully supporting and embracing a relationship with a regime KNOWN for it's human rights violations, amazing how easily liberals will openly demonstrate their hypocrisy and ignorance

[DaBoz]

I wouldn't mind getting to pick from the vintage autos they have.

[sweetwater5s9]

If there was a theme to 2014, it was Obama’s persistence in bailing out dictators and theocrats from political scrapes and economic hardships, his tenacity in pursuit of engagement with America’s adversaries no matter the cost to our strength, principles, credibility, or alliances.

In this president the thugs in Havana and Caracas, Damascus and Tehran, Moscow and Naypyidaw and Beijing have no better friend. For these bullies, these evildoers, these millenarians and sectarians, Barack Obama is more than a dupe. He is an insurance policy.

Dictators don’t have many friends. But they have Barack Obama.

Obama rescues tyrants from Havana to Damascus

[littleeye]

It might not be a bad thing for Americans to see how the enforcement of social justice destroys a nation.

[chuck_curtis]

Dictators don’t have many friends. But they have Barack Obama.


That's an interesting comment, since Washington has wheeled and dealt with dictators for decades.   I don't condone the interventionist foreign policy of buying political friends, making secret agreements, supporting subversives (including terrorists) to effect a goal, and carrying out covert coups (on dictators or otherwise) because it is almost always counterproductive, and it is wrong.   On the other hand, isolationist foreign policy benefits no one either.

[Truman62]

So why are you trying to impose YOUR beliefs on Cuba?

Why do you care?

You didn't seem to care last week, or last month?

You just don't want Obama getting any credit for a good thing.

Can you imagine how the economy will flourish when we open out trade with Cuba?

Just think of all that pent up demand... 

[sweetwater5s9]

It has been American policy for decades – the policy Obama says does not “work” – that the United States may and should provide significant aid as long as Cuba, in return, stops terrorizing its citizens, respects basic human and civil rights, respects democratic freedoms, refrains from arming terrorists and insurrectionists, liberalizes its economy, establishes a free press, and lays the groundwork for free and fair elections.

So, if that hasn’t “worked” to encourage Cuban reform, what is the president suggesting will “work”? Giving Cuba aid and legitimacy without requiring the regime to change? Why would we want to give an American taxpayer dime to, or help legitimize in any way, a regime that rejects these basic elements of a civilized society?

And has it occurred to the media and the president’s other apologists that American law and policy have not relentlessly mandated a blockade on and isolation of Cuba for all these years? All that had to happen to eliminate the restrictions, without any congressional action, was a halt to the persecution of the Cuban people by the Castro dictatorship.


Cuba is also listed by the State Dept. as a terrorist state.   

http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm


Countries determined by the Secretary of State to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism are designated pursuant to three laws: section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act, section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act, and section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act. Taken together, the four main categories of sanctions resulting from designation under these authorities include restrictions on U.S. foreign assistance; a ban on defense exports and sales; certain controls over exports of dual use items; and miscellaneous financial and other restrictions.

Designation under the above-referenced authorities also implicates other sanctions laws that penalize persons and countries engaging in certain trade with state sponsors. Currently there are four countries designated under these authorities: Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria.