Latin American countries unsuspend Cuba at the OAS unconditionally - U.S. against it

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#1
OAS member states agree to lift suspension of Cuba

BY FRANCES ROBLES
[email protected]
SAN PEDRO SULA, Honduras -- Cuba's 47-year suspension from the Organization of American States will be lifted, thanks to an agreement reached Wednesday by foreign ministers assembled in Honduras, diplomats here announced.

''The cold war has ended today in San Pedro Sula,'' Honduran President Manuel Zelaya said.

The United States-- which had been pressuring the OAS for weeks to condition Cuba's readmission to the hemispheric group on democratic principles and commitment to human rights -- characterized the agreement as good news, saying it does in fact contain important clauses.

Ecuador's foreign minister, Fander Falconí, told reporters there are no such conditions.

''This is a new proposal, it has no conditions -- of any kind,'' Falconí said. ``That suspension was made in the Cold War, in the language of the Cold War. What we have done here is fix a historic error.''

Cuba was suspended from the OAS in 1962. More and more Latin American nations had pushed for Cuba to be readmitted to the organization.

Hillary Clinton worked through the day Tuesday trying to convince Latin American nations to allow some conditions but left before reaching agreement.

The U.S. State Department pointed to crucial language within the resolution: ``...that Cuba's participation in the OAS would be the result of a dialogue initiated at the government of Cuba's request and in conformity with the practices, purposes and principles of the OAS.''

In 2001, the OAS passed the Inter-American Democratic Charter, which calls for member nations to embrace democracy.

''The historic action taken today eliminates a distraction from the past and allows us to focus on the realties of today,'' said State Department spokeswoman Sara A. Mangiaracina, ``and continue with the president's efforts to support the desire of the Cuban people to determine Cuba's future consistent with our core principles.''

The next step is Cuba's.

Cuba has called the organization a ''cadaver,'' and said publicly and often that it has no interest in joining.

''Here on forward we depend on the sovereign will of the State of Cuba,'' said Honduran OAS ambassador Carlos Sosa. ``If they show interest to return to the organization, they will do so within the normal procedures and a final decision would be made by the OAS plenary.''

University of Miami Cuba expert Andy Gomez, who was at the OAS conference this week, said the 1962 suspension may have been lifted, but to rejoin the organization, Cuba would have to agree to sign the organization's democratic charter.

''This is meaningless,'' Gomez said. ``This does not mean they are back in.''
 
Jul 6, 2008
2,157
2
0
44
#2
fuck that if the u.s has relations with china and their human rights and animal rights abuse, then they should have relations with cuba. cuba can do no worse than what china is doing right now.

plus, all taht missle crisis shit and cold war shit is old. move on time to let bygones be bygones and forget the past and move on with the future.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#4
plus, all taht missle crisis shit and cold war shit is old. move on time to let bygones be bygones and forget the past and move on with the future.


Are you consistent with that philosophy?


Do you feel the same way about the Native Americans and the US? African Americans and the US? Jews and Germany? Palestine and Israel? Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine and Russia? Etc.


Should Cuba just forget what the US did?


Would you apply that philosophy to your own life?
 

Stealth

Join date: May '98
May 8, 2002
7,137
1,177
113
40
#8
Ya Cuba does nothing that China doesnt do
What about appropriating US corporations in Cuba without giving any form of compensation?


I'm all for letting Cuba back into the OAS (even if it is a meaningless organization) and easing relations with them, but Cuba basically took over all of the American companies in Cuba. In my opinion, they still owe us what they stole from us.
 
Apr 25, 2002
10,848
198
0
39
#10
What about appropriating US corporations in Cuba without giving any form of compensation?


I'm all for letting Cuba back into the OAS (even if it is a meaningless organization) and easing relations with them, but Cuba basically took over all of the American companies in Cuba. In my opinion, they still owe us what they stole from us.
nationalization is dope , america needs to keep there greedy fuckin hands out of latin america and the carribean
 

Stealth

Join date: May '98
May 8, 2002
7,137
1,177
113
40
#12
nationalization is dope , america needs to keep there greedy fuckin hands out of latin america and the carribean
Nothing wrong with nationalization, but international law requires "just, adequate and fair compensation" for any expropriations.

If an American investor paid $100,000 in capitalization costs, assets, etc., for a billion dollar cigar industry, then the Cuban government can keep the billion dollar cigar industry, but they should pay the $100,000 to the investor in accordance with international law.

In that respect, America has a point. We shouldn't freeze relations with a country just because they are communist, but we ought to shake them down if they stole from us.
 
Feb 7, 2006
6,794
229
0
37
#15
From Dictionary.com - to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.

America steals what it has from the said group, rendering the stolen items of Americas, not Americas, therefore taking any of these items or their output from America is not stealing it is just taking, since America has no rights to what they have stolen or gained from the stolen items. At lest that's how I would make sense of it.
 

Stealth

Join date: May '98
May 8, 2002
7,137
1,177
113
40
#16
How can anyone say other countries have stolen from the US when the US is a country founded upon raping & stealing from the Indigenous peoples?
The people who had property in Cuba didn't rape or steal from anyone. These were just US citizens who happened to have a corporation in Cuba. They aren't Colonel Custer. They also aren't the United States government.

I'm an American citizen, and I can tell you right now that I don't have a single relative who killed an Indian or had a slave. My family got here in the 1900's. So if I start a corporation in Cuba, why should I let the Cuban government take my corporation without paying for it. Why do I have to pay for the sins of some American guys who killed some Indians 200 years ago?
 
Feb 7, 2006
6,794
229
0
37
#17
but let me ask you this, if I came to your house killed your family and kicked you out, put your house up for rent whatever, and some fool was in there livin it up partly because of the amenities your house provided him and his, and you had the chance to get your house back what would you do? Stay like a bum on the street, or take your shit back?

The point is your unwittingly helping in the destruction of someone else's life, because you are taking part in the scheme by buying, supporting,ignoring, agreeing, etc. with the interest of the original transgressor.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#18
but let me ask you this, if I came to your house killed your family and kicked you out, put your house up for rent whatever, and some fool was in there livin it up partly because of the amenities your house provided him and his, and you had the chance to get your house back what would you do? Stay like a bum on the street, or take your shit back?

1) When did we kick Cuba out of their house?


2) What about the guy that owned the house before me? Native Americas weren't exactly born with the land they occupied when Europeans took it from them, there were many territorial conflicts between Native Americans long before they were loosing their land to Europeans.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#19
From Dictionary.com - to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.

America steals what it has from the said group, rendering the stolen items of Americas, not Americas, therefore taking any of these items or their output from America is not stealing it is just taking, since America has no rights to what they have stolen or gained from the stolen items. At lest that's how I would make sense of it.


So if you steal my car and Stealth steals your watch, that is not stealing from you because you originally stole something from me?:confused: