Is Bush rejecting aid?

Alright, it was just brought up on Hannity and Colmes. Is he seriously not accepting aid from countries like Jamaica? Am I missing something here or did I mishear it? Oh, for all of you Hugo Chavez haters, according to Fox News, he has offered 'planeloads of workers' to help in the relief effort.

My roommate told me a couple hours ago that Germany offered to send 2 planes of help, and Bush said no. :rolleyes:

WHY?!?!

I'll see if I can find the link, but I also read on-line that Canada has offered to help as well, but was waiting for a reply (I assume from Bush.)


TIS

I have not seen or heard these stories on ANY news station, or radio stations be they Conservative or Liberal stations. And I've been listening to them all. So until these things are confirmed to be true stories, I wouldn't go around stating them as fact.


Don Cardi

Venezuelan President Offers Aid For Katrina Victims

August 30, 2005 10:11 p.m. EST


Douglas Maher - All Headline News Staff Reporter

Caracas, Venezuela (AHN) - Last week Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez was attacking the U.S. for comments from 700 Club President, Pat Robertson, about calling for an assassination of the leader; Tuesday Chavez is offering aid to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

"We place at the disposition of the people of the United States in the event of shortages we have drinking water, food, we can provide fuel," Chavez tells Associated Press.

Chavez says fuel can be sent to the United States through a Citgo refinery that has not been affected by the hurricane. Citgo is owned by Venezuela's state-owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela. He also offers to send aid workers to the gulf coast.

Chavez made an offer last week for discount gasoline to poor Americans suffering from high oil prices and offered free eye surgery for Americans without access to health care.

Chavez is heavily criticized for his socialist/communist ties in Latin America and has had negative relations with Washington for years.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/2250908522

This isn't the same story I saw earlier, but here's one link regarding Canada's offer.


web page

Oh, and here's another listing a couple other countries that have offered help. Seems these would be a "desperate times" scenario where we should accept all the help we are offered no? Maybe it's redtape????

web page

Now the European Union is offering oil from its reserves to the U.S.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/D8CC51BO0.html

Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man. Always sticks with his instinct and knows he's gonna get people riled up.

Bush first said he needed nothing but the sympathy of other countries, and he refused help.
Later, he changed his mind, and said he accepted all help.

Russa, Belgium, France, Germany, and the UK, all offered help. Venezuela did too, but some BB'ers say it's worhtless help, only as a PR-stunt. I'm not gonna judge about that, since I don't know what really happened.

Ronnie, while I am sure that the gesture is a sincere one, they can offer all of the oil that they want. If it is NOT already refined and converted, then it is useless at this time. We have a Gasoline and heating oil problem right now. Oil needs to be refined and cracked to convert it to Gasoline and Heating Oil. And our problem right now is that we do NOT have the refineries to convert and refine stuff. If a country like Mexico with all of it's refinery capabilities were to offer us heating oil and gasoline, well then that would be a big help to us at this very moment.


Don Cardi

And our problem right now is that we do NOT have the refineries to convert and refine stuff. If a country like Mexico with all of it's refinery capabilities were to offer us heating oil and gasoline, well then that would be a big help to us at this very moment.


Don Cardi [/b][/quote]Yes we do DC. Did you not read the article I posted?

Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man. Always sticks with his instinct and knows he's gonna get people riled up. [/quote]You've got to be kidding me.

Oh yeah, he's having a moment of silence. What sympathy. BULLSHIT. This is to overlook his spewing of anti-Americano propaganda the last 50 years? :rolleyes:

Go live in Cuba for a couple of months and then say "Long Live Fidel"...

What about all the Anti-Cubano talk of several American presidents.

I'm not pro-Castro, but you have to stay fair.

More like Anti-Castro talk.

Really Patrick....you saying a great thing about a bastard dictator?

And our problem right now is that we do NOT have the refineries to convert and refine stuff. If a country like Mexico with all of it's refinery capabilities were to offer us heating oil and gasoline, well then that would be a big help to us at this very moment.


Don Cardi [/b][/quote]Yes we do DC. Did you not read the article I posted? [/b][/quote]Yes Pat, I read the article. We do NOT have the refineries to convert crude oil to heating oil or gasoline. The hurricane crippled our refining capabilities.

The article stated at the time that they were not sure if Crude Oil or Refined oil would be sent.

It now turns out that they will give converted refined product which is gasoline and heating oil.

That makes a big difference Pat. A big difference. It helps us right now. Unfortunately it is only a short term solution and this problem will catch up to us within the next several months. But it NOW takes a huge burden off of our backs and will help us buy some time to get those refineries up and running again. Unfortunately they still do NOT know the extent of the damage. The good news this afternoon along with the european countries giving us the oil Product that we need is that one of the piplines that thought destroyed in the hurricane began working again at a 32% capacity to pump the oil that had been already refined and converted. It's not much, but it's a positive start.

Don Cardi

I have trouble believing this 'sympathy' that Castro has towards this American tragedy. He has been speaking out against America for 50 years, and all of a sudden he wants to sympathize? Uh uh, I don't believe that for a second. AND I have trouble saying anything good about this bastard who has been murdering people and HATING this country with a complete passion for the last fifty years.

Pat, do you know anyone who's fled Cuba to come to America?


Don Cardi

Exactly DC.

Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man. Always sticks with his instinct and knows he's gonna get people riled up. [/quote]Oh, yeah, he's a real humanitarian who deserves to be admired. Let's just ignore the fact that he pointed nukes at your country, shall we? :rolleyes:

Just because he hates our country and government doesn't mean he hates America's citizens. And I'm not going to get into a big debate about the missle crisis or anything because I'm pretty sure everyone knows how I feel about that. The 2 big power houses in the 60's were the US and USSR. The US didn't want any part of Castro just because he was a socialist, so that left Castro with allying with the USSR or nobody. What would you do? And if a government had plotted your assasination numerous times, would you speak positive about them?

DC, no I don't know anyone who came here from Cuba. And here:

Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man. Always sticks with his instinct and knows he's gonna get people riled up. [/quote]I looked at a little piece of parchment once while I was in Washington called the COnstitution of the United States. It's a real swell work of art. It has an amendment in there called the first amendment which allows for freedom of speach in this nation. Congratulations and be thankful for it Pat because you're able to spew your communist, pinko propoganda on these boards and no one can do a thing (Unless JG banned you). Now, what if you were spewing capitolist propoganda on the streets of Santiago or Havana at this very moment? You know what would happen? You'd begin to pray to that God that you don't belive in anymore.

Say, have you happened to read a history book lately or see a news paper? Seems that Castro's socialist paradise is falling on it's ass. Remeber a little hurricane that tore throw Cuba just recently? Well if your complaning about or response to Katrina, you'd be disgusted at what was done in Cuba. If you think it was bad before, well now many places have no light, people who were on life suport in the hospitals died, including the brother of one of my neighbors.

Hell, I haven't even begun to tell you of the things Castro did to my family, making my grandmother witness to his revolution, showing her the attrocities of his war against the Baustistan Government. He made her flee Cuba, were she was prosperous and come to this country alone with no husband and two young kids at her side. She had to adjust because of Castro's revolution and had a tough life. Just thank god that she was tough enough to meet the challenges put agianst her. I bet you that's something you couldn't over come. You'd bitch about your human rights. There's no human rights in Cuba. It's all solved by six rifle men. We wouldn't get that lucky in your case though.

Pat, if you can't read this long rant then I'll spell it out for you: F-U-C-K Y-O-U.

I was actually admiring that post because of everything you shared, until the last sentence, Mike.

Hmm, yes Batista was so much better, right? :rolleyes:

I'm not sure what you're saying, but if I'm understanding, did a brother of one of your neighbors die in Cuba or New Orleans? Either way, there's people dying in New Orleans that can't get proper life support right now.

Yeh, but I'm not spewing anything in Cuba right now.

So, by your own admission, he (Castro) was a ruthless dictator, yet you "admire" him and find him to be an "inspiration" ...

:rolleyes:

But if Cuba is so great, why not move there, Pat? After all, Castro needs another yes-man for his legions.

Quote:

Now, what if you were spewing capitolist propoganda on the streets of Santiago or Havana at this very moment? You know what would happen? You'd begin to pray to that God that you don't belive in anymore.

Yeh, but I'm not spewing anything in Cuba right now. [/quote]Pat, save for the spelling errors which weere my fault, i think that I made my point very clear. If you bitch about the response to Katrina, immagine how bad the response to the prior hurricane that struck Cuba was.

Oh, and as for the whole comment on spewing propoganda:
That one requires you to use your "imagination". I just had a collective flashback to a purple dinosaur....

I want to recount one moment in history in 1953 when Castro and his cronies open up fire on an Army Baracks filled with soldiers killing dozens and wounding many more.

Does this sound like something a normal human being worthy of respect does?

He's a dictator who also violates some human rights, but compared to Batista, we're not even getting started. Wanna talk about human rights offenses? Let's talk about the US military in Guantanamo Bay.

Yeh, because I can just hop on a plane and go to Cuba. I'd love to visit Cuba. There's a little thing called an embargo you should check out. It prohibits me from doing so.

How about JFK ordering 1,000 exiled Cubans back to Cuba to try and kill Fidel? Is that worthy of respect?

It was a failure of CIA inteligance! And at least Kennedy wasn't leading the charge and wasn't pepered with the blood of soldiers.
At this point I think it's best that we return to the topic before it's rendered useless.

He's a dictator who also violates some human rights, but compared to Batista, we're not even getting started. Wanna talk about human rights offenses? Let's talk about the US military in Guantanamo Bay.[/quote]I dunno. Why don't you list some of the Batista atrocities, and we can compare and contrast (or are you just talking out your ass?)

Also, we could try not changing the topic to Guantamo Bay, that would be a good start, since it's not getting your argument anywhere. I thought we were debating Batista v. Castro, or, at least, any "admirable" qualities that can be found in Fidel's resume.

Actually, if you were a journalist/student, you could go down there. Or, you could try (gasp) sneaking into the country! I'm sure Fidel would absolutely love the publicity of a disgrunted American teenager defecting to his communist nation. He'd get a bigger hard on than he did when he thought Elian would come back.

Dunno, is it? I mean, you're trying to spin so much, I think it's a washing machine in here.

Explain to me why Castro is worthy of admiration and respect.

I'm not doing to state anything in this thread because this isn't the topic and what you're talking about is a deadbeat horse. You can check out my volume on Fidel. I feel the exact same way as I always have about him. Enjoy your evening.

Aww...



*sniffle*
*tissue*



Now whose ball are we going to play with?

You can play with George's.

"Son, it's not racism in New Orl-ans. Now, just turn and cough. As a part of our new free health care (like Canada), we can't afford doctors. So I'm here to give you a checkup. They all said I was the most qualified when it came to matters of sex-u-al health, I dunno why. Show me your balls."

Ok, let's not allow this topic to become one of personal attacks and disrespect towards one another. Make your points but please do so without the personal insults.


Don Cardi

Castro has offered 26 tons of aid and also 1,500 doctors, according to CNN.

Sri Lanka has offered $25,000

Afghanistan $100,000

China $5 million

Greece has offered 2 cruise ships as shelters and also aid workers

Belgium has sent doctors ...

25,000 means MUCH more to Sri Lanka then it does to the United States relief effort. I wouldn't accept that money from them, it's the thought that counts and that country can use it more.

You know what? At this point, I think we should take them all up on their offers. Let's see how serious they all are, and if they are, that's great.

Though it seems controversial, I think I'd have to agree with Pat. I'm not anti-America, but I respect Castro as an individual, but not a political figure. I've read about him. Now trust me, politically I do not like Castro because of his hate for this country (clashes with my love for this country). However, the way he can lead a successful revolution, and win the approval of his people (unlike what our president can do in this country, not comparing, just stating an observation) is somewhat respectable.

However, I will not be moving to Cuba any time soon.

For fuck's sake, Castro is a fucking dictator who jails people with the wrong opinions and who has murdered thousands. Why debate if he was worse or better than Batista? Is there any interest in who is least ruthless or least brutal? No point at all.

Gustav - holy shit! Good to see you mang, at least back here.

BTW - are you ready for NHL 2K6 to come out or what?

Also, Castro's history isn't relevant to some people on this board, despite the fact that we have at least two members who know firsthand of his actions, and have posted about such. He's still a "good" guy. So don't try and reason, 'Stav.

I'm afraid I don't like that series anymore. In recent years, EA Sports' games has been very unrealistic and when it comes to sports I want realism. NHL 2004 made me tired of it. Sadly, there is no real alternative if you want to play NHL games on the PC.

'Stav - not EA's arcadey garbage...

SegaSport's/2K Sports/Take Two have been the hockey sim kings since 2003.

I don't know if you can get ahold of a PAL version of this, but it superb. It really is the best sports simulation of any sport.

IGN Review: NHL 2K6 by Sega Sports

Oh yes, I know about that series, but its not available for PC (the earlier versions weren't at least) and I dont have any consoles

BTW, Pro Evolution Soccer, or Winning Eleven as I believe it's called in USA, is another great sports simulation that widely beats EA's counterpart.

I'll have to check it out...is there a PS2 version?

Yes, it's for XB, PS2 and PC. http://ps2.ign.com/objects/752/752960.html

The most recent version should be called Winning Eleven 8 in the US.

I know you're not talking about me, at least I hope you aren't. I don't want my message to be misinterpreted.

Castro's a nice guy?

Let's see here. I live in Miami. I pass by the immigration building who's lines are 3 blocks long (NOT joking.) Most of which are Cuban refugees trying to get papers desperatley to NOT be sent back to the Nice Guy. Hmm, even Tony Montana, who is the protaginist in a film which many like here, WAS A CUBAN REFUGEE. If Fidelito was such a nice guy, why didn't he stay? "I kill a communist for fun." I wonder where that hate came from... :rolleyes: The images you see in the beginning are real, folks. Those are 125,000+ escaping from the "Great Individual".

I know you're not talking about me, at least I hope you aren't. I don't want my message to be misinterpreted. [/b][/quote]No, mang, I'm referring to our resident left-wing apologist who forgives Cuba for aiming nuclear missiles at us and threatening absolute nuclear annihilation.

Who on this board is pro castro? I havent seen anyone making posts like that. Double J do you have a leg to stand on?

Don Cardi

I never said I was pro-Castro. I'm certainly not anti-Castro, but pro? DC, learn to understand things before you post them. "You can learn better if you just listen!" :rolleyes:

How about "Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man." You did write that. Some folks may confuse "admire" with pro. And wishing him a long life might also have the same affect. But, yes you never used the word "pro" as meaning support for or agreeing with Castro. :rolleyes:

Correct my friend. Never did use pro. And there's a bunch of political figures I'm not 'pro' or 'anti' of. Some examples would be Tony Blair, Hugo Chavez, and Howard Dean. I'm going to assume you voted for Kerry. Does this mean you're pro-Kerry? I know I'm certainly not.

I don't know what evidence would lead you to that assumption.

[IMG]

Entry Word: admire
Function: verb
Text: to think very highly or favorably of Synonyms appreciate, esteem, regard, respect
Related Words acclaim, accredit, applaud, approve, commend, compliment, credit, praise; delight (in), drink (in), enjoy, relish, revel (in), savor; dig, fancy, favor, groove (on), like, love; adore, deify, idolize, revere, reverence, venerate, worship; cherish, prize, treasure, value


Main Entry: pro
Function: noun
1 : an argument or evidence in affirmation
2 : the affirmative side or one holding it


Admire seems to be stronger than Pro
You may want to reconsider

I admire George for his efforts, but he always fails. Am I pro-Bush now?

You don,t need to be Pro Bush, just keep on admiring him.
That will do just fine

I don't know what evidence would lead you to that assumption. [/b][/quote]It is just to make an assumption, it doesn't have to be true. It is just to make a start to what he really wanted to say.

How about "Long live Fidel. I truly admire this man." You did write that. Some folks may confuse "admire" with pro. And wishing him a long life might also have the same affect. But, yes you never used the word "pro" as meaning support for or agreeing with Castro. :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]I'm not pro-you, cause I don't know you in person, but I still wish you a long life.

Wow, after all that...thank you Enzo and Patrick. I love you both.

See MaryCas's posts, Enzo's explanation, and any of the posts from the past two years regarding Cuba, the Helms-Burton Embargo, and the Cold War in general.

No matter how he splits linguistic hairs, Patrick is pro-Castro. Undoubtedly.

Or maybe he's just (gasp) anti-American? :p

Someone being Pro-Castro bothers me more actually...

I think we should erect statues (among other things ) to all dictators who point nuclear missiles at us, and give them amnesty and a role in our government. After all, Fidel's such a nice guy, so...admirable. :rolleyes:

I don't know about your idea for statues, JJ, but I cetainly think we should do something to commemorate all of those right wing dictators from various countries who we've supported over the years and whose countries apparently were lacking whatever it is that Iraq has that qualifies it for assistance in the implementation of democracy.

Good point Plawrence.

Very well said indeed.

That would be anti-communist, anti-Soviet stances.

Pat, why you dig Castro anyway? I've never understood it...okay, maybe I would have if I wasn't too lazy to search back this board.

'Cause Che and Fidel stick it to 'da man, mang! :rolleyes:

'Cause Che and Fidel stick it to 'da man, mang! :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]I actually don't like Che at all. And you're humor is so poor that it is actually making me laugh at you now.

RRA - I don't 'dig' Castro. I just admire anyone who tries to do something for the better of the people. He didn't overthrow a great government. He overthrew a corrupted government. Anyways, read my posts from a little back. -Pat

'Cause Che and Fidel stick it to 'da man, mang! :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]I actually don't like Che at all. And you're humor is so poor that it is actually making me laugh at you now.

RRA - I don't 'dig' Castro. I just admire anyone who tries to do something for the better of the people. He didn't overthrow a great government. He overthrew a corrupted government. Anyways, read my posts from a little back. -Pat [/b][/quote]Well, at least you're reading my posts, which is a plus.

Sure, he overthrew Batistas government. Then, he slept with the Soviets, and brought forth the great world revolution that has left his nation and her people on the brink of poverty, powerless without the Soviets, and a group of peoples persucuted and fleeing to the United States, risking life and limb every year.

Oh, and he also threatened America with nuclear weapons.

But he's still a great guy, after all. :rolleyes:

Batista was the head of a corrupt regime in Cuba, for which Castro overthrew...and thus became head of a corrupt regime in Cuba. Different ideologues or imperial partners in bed, but both were still bastards.

Besides, how can I respect a regime that doesn't respect basic human rights like Freedom of Speech or Press or even the right to assemble and protest the government? The government has and continues to jail government protestors and persecute attempts by many groups to demonstrate publicly for more freedoms granted to the populace.

"Tries to help the people..."

You mean Castro and his regime, right? :p

I remember watching Stone's HBO documentary on his interview with Castro...and you see a tyrant that doesn't understand why many of his people oppose him or several of his actions. Gee I wonder why... :rolleyes:

Mmm, agreed. Much like the Somozas in Nicaragua, Batista wasn't exactly the best leader in the world. However, in comparison to the regimes that took over after them, I think that they are mild in many instances. Certainly, I would at the very least prefer the pro-American dictator to a Sandinista or a Castro, but that's me. I'm a patriot. I'm a nationalist.

Oh yes, the well-worn "Lesser of Two Evils"...

Its still Evil!

Really, and we wonder why the social/governmental matrix of our nation lacks logic and common sense...

Fact is, when you compromise American values of freedom(as Bush truely in his heart truely believes in) in speech and basic human rights that a government should never inflict on its populace, for the sake of some short-term ally in some global chess game being played out in a Boardroom Meeting at the Pentagon, then how much do we really value freedom?

Again, while I agree that we are all citizens of the world...

...I am an American citizen first.

And I want what is best for America.

It is as simple as that.

Now, I'm not being naive, I told you that I understand that Somoza and Batista and others like him were bad. But I consider the comparison to be pale when examining what the Stalin regime and the spread of Soviet Communism had done to eastern Europe...the Pols, for example.

The Soviets had to be stopped at any cost. Stalin was just as bad as Hitler. Again, as I told Plaw, the Truman quote sums it up nicely.

Would it be nice if we could be moralistic in foreign policy? Of course. If we could ally with peaceful nations, then that would be best, of course. But it isn't realistic. Don't you think that economic deals with shady nations like Saudi Arabia or China in the past don't coincide with American freedoms and ideals? If you take it to that level, than internationalism and capitalism, on a moral level, really doesn't fit with American ideals.

But we're not talking moralism here. We're talking about the US foreign policy, which, in this instance, was necessary to prevent and contain the Soviet menace and the spread of evil.

Umm, preventing the spread of "evil" by using "evil" regimes as check-mate. Am I lost here?

Besides, thats what pisses me off about any government like ours. To be honest, we only fly the flag of human rights and "freedom" when its convenient. Thing is, the nations of Western Europe are notorius for doing this as well.

Fact is, our governments(not the same as "nations" or "countries") of America, Canada, and Western Europe tend to act whatever is in the best interest of our governments, no matter how this ranks in the scales of morality.

Double J, am I wrong on the last point? Even you gotta agree with me on that.

A little. It boils down to whether we were going to let Stalin spread his evil (yes, evil) or we were going to try and establish pro-American, pro-Capitalist governments. It wasn't American priority at the time to chide our allies for any human rights violations.

As I said, the argument has fallacy when looking at it from a moralistic standpoint. But as I said, it really came down to the lesser of two evils.

Of course, though I certainly would hold the US government to a higher standard than any other nation, and deservedly so, for the most part.

That's really not wholly surprising. Of course, especially in the capitalist system, it's going to be for the best survival of the country, and if some feelings are hurt, then so be it.

Of course. As a student of both US foreign policy and international politics, your statement is absolutely true, I'm not going to dispute that.

But like I said - I'm an American, and I want what is best for America.

Thanks DJ...

Speaking of which, I do hate when many people that reside from members of the World's Elite in Japan, Canada, and Western Europe(and even OPEC, but that is another post...) do like to trash the U.S. for being an evil Imperialist nation.

That is like several pretty good lawyers for a Law Firm attacking the most successful and richest attorney of the Firm for "getting scumbags off the hook", "Being a Bastard", "Lying/Burying Evidence", "A Yuppie Asshole", etc.

Now I'm not like many Neo-cons that think all Europeans, Canadians, or Japanese are Anti-American "liberal" douchebag cowards. Most are good honest people as we see here at BB.Net, but their governments is as hypocritical in so many issues and problems as the "Imperial American Pigs". I mean I remember months ago when Denmark announced it planned to start drilling for oil in Greenland and even their territorial claim in Antartica, but then I remember members of their Parliament earlier lambasting America for not adopting friendlier environmental programs. :rolleyes:

Of course, I do support improving the condition of our environment in America, and yes I believe in Global Warming. However, I just hate flat-face hypocrites. Then again, who doesn't?

Here is a rather good example of a current debate I'm having over the Greenhouse effect.

I'm certainly no fan of Fidel Castro.

He overthrew a brutal right wing dictatorship and established a brutal left wing dictatorship in its place, so from the POV of what's best for the United States, we were better of with Batista.

From the POV of the Cuban people, I don't see that it makes very much difference, although I will admit that I am not too familiar with the details of either regime.

But let's get our facts straight here:

It was not Castro who threatened the U.S. with nuclear weapons.

It was the Soviets. Establishing a Soviet missle base in Cuba was part of the quid pro quo for the economic and military aid that the Russians provided in exchange.

I don't believe that there was ever any doubt that it would be the Soviets who would be in control of the missles and determine if and when they would ever be used.

The whole Cuban Missle Crisis was just another move in the cold war chess game between the Soviet Union and the United States, and Castro and Cuba were nothing more than pawns.

I disagree of the use of the term "pawns" as you suggested, but obviously the Soviets had more influence over the Cubans than the Cubans did on the USSR...

Ah.
Why?

They were both dictators. Which is of course very bad. :rolleyes:

But I'd rather prefer a left dictator, then a nazi-racist dictator.

You?

Btw, I'm not a communist, I'm not pro-Stalin, or whatever things you might think of me now.

Hitler killed 9 million, Stalin killed well over 20 million.

I wouldn't take either but if I had to choose I think I'd rather be a German in Germany than a Russian in Russia.

The number is arguable. Hitler started a war, so indirectly he caused many more deads.

I also wanted to mention that we underestimate the Russian part in the victory very much. Russia offered many, many more lives than any other country in order to wipe out the fascism and end the war. I'm not deminishing the American input, that started in Normandy, but Russian and American military actions are at least even.

And if I'm speaking entirely on the true meanings of the systems, what they truly represent:
Communism >>>>>> Fascism

No?

Considering, in return for hosting and aiming the nukes, Fidel received economic aid and weapons technology, he plays more than the role of a pawn. If he didn't really want to do such a thing, why didn't he refuse the aid and tell the Soviets he didn't want to play ball?

Granted, yes, they were Soviet missiles. But it's a little like suing Derringer because some guy shot you. The missiles were coming from the country of Cuba. If he wished, Castro could've either refused to place the missiles or deactivated them on his own.

Statistics wise, Stalin actually killed more people than Hitler, I believe. This would encompass the mass starvations in Poland, the Ukraine, etc., as well as domestically.

So you would prefer Stalin, who was an equal murderer? Seems rather silly to me.

No, it's not. The numbers are Stalin's from deaths in Poland, Ukraine, and the other areas of East Germany as well as inside the Soviet Union.

And I don't see how anyone who starts are war is "indirectly" causing more "deads," it seems to be pretty cause-and-effect in my view.

So Stalin gets a free pass, even though he was as brutal, if not more brutal, than Hitler?

So Stalin gets a free pass, even though he was as brutal, if not more brutal, than Hitler? [/QUOTE]


There you go again Double Jay. Show me one person on this thread who has given Stalin a "free pass?"

And BTW, Double J the solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis was JFK's brilliant insistence that some alternative to war was worked out. Although there was no direct linkage, part of the deal was that we agreed to remove some nuke missiles on the USSR border in Turkey, which, unbeknownst to the Russians, were scheduled to be removed anyway. Thank God the likes of George W. Bush was not in office back then.

Ok, so if he would've declined any aid from the Soviets, Cuba wouldn't have been anything. The US was already planning on assasinating him, so it was the US who turned their backs on Castro just because he was a socialist. I would've done the same damn thing if I was Castro and you would've too, and you know it!

Yeh, because the Soviets wouldn't have cared. The Soviets would've beat the hell out of Cuba if Castro took those missles down.

I'm also going to go with Stalin.

Yes, it is. Hitler started a World War. If you ask me, he was responsible for every life lost because there would've been no loss of life had the Germans not started invading countries and killing everyone. Hitler, alone, is responsible for the deaths of 6 million Jews. His army (which took orders from him) are responsible for the millions of other deaths.

Please show me who said Stalin gets a free pass.

So Stalin gets a free pass, even though he was as brutal, if not more brutal, than Hitler? [/quote]The US lost some 450,000 lives in WWII.
The Russians lost 20,000,000 lives. They sacrificed an enormous amount of people. Without the Russians, Hitler would've won (arguable).
Everyone is always saying, the USA liberated Europe, but that's only partly true.
The USA helped very, very good (and we are very grateful for that!!), but we should thank the Russians even more.

That's all, I said nothing about a free pass for Stalin.

BTW, the reason why I choose to be under Stalin, than to be under Hitler is:
Stalin killed people because they were against his system. Hitler did it because of his morals, because of the dirtiest form of racism ever seen. To me, the Holocaust is the ultimate form of all the bestialities the human being can do.
Btw, I prefer to be a German in Hitler's Germany, than a Russian in Stalin's Russia. But then I would be a nazi, part of that dirty system.
And another btw, I prefer to be a Russian in Stalin's Russia, than a communist/gibsy/jew/black/mentally ill, ... in nazi-Germany.

But to take away any doubt, Stalin was a despicable dictator who killed a huge amount of people.

Hitler, Stalin, and the Belgian king Leopold II were the most gruesome killing dictators of the 20th century.

Okay.

Yes, I knew that, but thanks for the attempted history lesson.

Yes, since he's been starting nuclear wars everywhere since coming into office. :rolleyes:

The policy of "containment," originated by President Truman, was an effort to prevent the spread of communism across the globe. The fear was that if Cuba was allowed to turn communist, and Pro-Soviet, it could lead to the entire Latin American continent becoming littered with anti-American nations friendly to the Soviets, and supplying them with resources in exchange for arms.

The US wasn't just against Castro, they were trying to prevent Communist governments from arising across the globe (Turkey, Greece, for example, and later, South Korea and southern Vietnam). In all of these instances there was US intervention of some sort.

We didn't "turn our backs" on Castro - we never had his back in the first place. Having an anti-American dictator that close to the United States wasn't a prospect that Kennedy was going to take lightly.

What makes you think so? If Cuba had decided to ally or at least remain amicable with the US, it is doubtful the Soviets would have started nuclear holocaust over Cuba.

Then you, imho, are a naive fool, choosing to ignore the facts that Stalin and even his counterpart Mao Zedong in China were just as brutal and oppresive as Hitler, and murdered in similar or greater numbers in Stalin's case.

So what about the millions upon millions of Pols killed by Stalin? How about the Ukrainian famines? Even the internal purges and grain massacres inside of the USSR? Those weren't of Hitler's doing, and they were occurring at the same time of Hitler and into the post-war era.

Mmm, this is true, the Russians provided needed manpower as the French and British forces both weren't able to maintain effectiveness alongside the Americans.

How so? Granted, numbers wise, the Russians lost more men, but does that mean that their sacrifice is more important, or the US's is less important?

Stalin hated the Pols, and as I've said, everyone is ignoring the Ukrainian and Polish holocausts that occurred under Stalin. And Stalin didn't just kill people because they were against him, he befriended the Pols and drove out the Germans only to slaughter them after they took power.

Just for the record:

Castro: Cuba Could Have Saved U.S. Victims
By ANITA SNOW, AP

HAVANA (AP) - President Fidel Castro on Monday lamented that the U.S. government had not still responded two weeks after he offered to send nearly 1,600 Cuban doctors to help Hurricane Katrina victims, saying the team could have saved lives.

The U.S. government has suggested there were sufficient American physicians to care for the ailing among those displaced by the storm across Louisiana and Mississippi.

An appeal for help from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services "has seen a robust response from the American medical community," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said earlier this month.

"It hurts to think about it," Castro told several thousand doctors gathered for a combined graduation and the formation of Cuba's new international disaster team of experienced health workers.

"Perhaps some of those desperate people, situated in the water and on the verge of dying, could have been saved," the Cuban leader said.

"That's a hard lesson for those whose false pride and erroneous concepts have driven them not to respond, even late, to our offer," Castro said of American officials.

A State Department spokesman in Washington said Monday night there was no immediate reaction to Castro's latest comments.

Washington and Havana have not had diplomatic relations for more than four decades and Castro's offer put U.S. officials in the uncomfortable position of deciding whether to accept help from a country they have described as an "outpost of tyranny."

Castro himself has routinely turned down offers of U.S. humanitarian relief for hurricanes and other disasters in Cuba. After Hurricane Dennis pummeled the island in July, he expressed gratitude but rejected Washington's offer of $50,000 in aid.

Che was an excellent writer though. Just read The Motorcycle Diaries before the political stuff.

Che was an excellent writer though. Just read The Motorcycle Diaries before the political stuff. [/b][/quote]Saladbar-

I don't know much at all about this Che guy. Yet I see t-shirts with his picture on it and have seen many posts here mentioning him.

Could you perhaps enlighten me with some information about him? I would really appreciate it.


Don Cardi

Well, he is a revolutionary icon and allegedly assassinated by the US. I suggest before getting any canned "Che" information about his life as a revolutionary in Mexico and Cuba that you read the Motorcycle Diaries and learn why he became who it was. You might actually like the youthful Ernesto Guevara and be less reactionary to his icon status.

Thanks Saladbar.


Don Cardi

Okay.

Quote:

Hitler started a war, so indirectly he caused many more deads.

[/quote]
When I say that massmurderer #1 is more despicable than massmurderer #2 because #1 caused more deads, then I'm giving #2 a free pass???

Strange thinking pattern you have there, JJ.

Enzo you just noticed? :rolleyes:

Nah, but this one was exceptional.

I'm just failing to see how you can say Hitler was "worse" than Stalin when in fact Stalin killed more. At the very least, I would think they would be of equal abhorrence.

We should throw Pol Pot in there too coming in third by numbers alone. Though if you say Hitler started World War 2, then his death count is between 36 and 40 million.

Hitler tends to be seen as the worst because though it is one thing to be killed because you spoke out against the government, it's another to be killed just because your grandma was a Jew. Hitler killed to wipe out and annihilate on the basis of race, Stalin/Pol pot killed because they was paranoid and because believed it would better their country in their own warped way. Hitler built the world's first industrial death factories. Plus he is looked down by the U.S. because he fought a bloody war with the United States and our allies, whereas Stalin killed millions of his political enemies. Hitler stills has a following (looks at some people on this BB), Stalin has few, if any, followers still.

Oh yea, and Nazis make better film villains.

Really, though, what difference does it make? The end result is the same: corpses. All three were profoundly evil people and just great role models for murderous megalomaniacal tyrants!

I wholeheartedly agree. I just think that it is important to understand how evil Stalin really was, and what he had done to much of Eastern Europe. Too often it is forgotten in favor of arguments of how the US was "paranoid" about the Soviets who simply wanted acceptance of their economic system.

While the fear of communism itself might be true to a degree, it is also important to remeber who was behind the regime in Russia, a genocidal paranoid who killed ally and enemy alike.

And yes, Pol Pot can be tossed in there as well. You could add Idi Amin as well.

BTW - Welcome back, I haven't seen you around in awhile. Always nice to see a familiar face.

And as far as movies go..."Triumph of the Will" should send shivers down anyones spine.

The biggest murderers according to this site:
Joseph Stalin Soviet Union 1929-1953 42,672,000
Mao Tse-tung China 1923-1976 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler Germany 1933-1945 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek China 1921-1948 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin Soviet Union 1917-1924 4,017,000
Tojo Hideki Japan 1941-1945 3,990,000
Pol Pot Cambodia 1968-1987 2,397,000
Yahya Khan Pakistan 1971 1,500,000
Josip Tito Yugoslavia 1941-1987 1,172,000

Worth mentioning here is that the numbers of Stalin and especially Mao Tsetung are most likely greatly bigger than those given here. Also it is interesting that Pol Pot in a period of less than 5 years managed to murder 1/3 of his people (Cambodia had 6 million inhabitants).

I also wonder:
What is it that makes the US government of higher standard than the governments in Western Europe?

And would like to say that:
Nationalism is also something I think that we all should refrain from after we saw what happened in the 1900s.

Likely the intent and goals of our regimes, as well as the fact that the US doesn't explicitly kill civilians for political goals (we don't go around killing folks in Czech-Republic because we want to control their territory).

Yes, we have attacked civilians (firebombing Tokyo, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) but the United States is one of the few nations in the world that hasn't had a socio-political revolution (i.e. Bolsheviks in Russia, for example) and has had consistency throughout its lifetime as far as relative government stability. I think that because of this, we haven't had a dictatorial or totalitarian government that enforced its will upon the region through terror and violence. We haven't had a Stalin, or a Mao. In fact, we've had more weak leaders than strong figures that are easily remembered (William Henry Harrison, anyone?)

Not saying that is why, I'm just reasoning. I mean, I know I certainly wouldn't put Truman on the same level as Stalin in this case (though Christ may disagree and Harry S. might be pitching brimstone in Hell right now).

"Now who's beng nieve Kay?" j/k


Don Cardi

I doubt Stalin killed more than 42 million, even this number seems impossible.
Anyway, this site is incomplete because Belgian king Leopold II managed to kill somewhere between 2 and 7 million Congolese in the years he ruled Congo, being 1885 - 1908.

What about Ho Chi Minh?

Enzo Scifo (good player), if you read the headline of that site you see that this is about the stars of the 20th century...

Why is it impossible that Stalin killed 42 million? I think it is highly possible, farmers starved to death for several years in the 30s. In addition to that, the paranoid fucker sent several millions to Gulag and death (including Molotov's wife, actually).

Double-J, I don't see why all this gives your government a higher standard than the Western European?

In addition, I would say, even though I am a bit cautious because of the fact that there was communism to fight, that those who were murdered in Argentina and Chile don't agree that you didn't control the area by terror and violence.

Enzo, I would put it like this:
Communism == Fascism

On paper, they hate each other, in reality it's the same shit really. Both hate liberalism and democracy. Both generates unthinkable horrors and violence.

Well yes, the difference being that the idea itself of communism isn't evil or even insane. Just too unrealistic.

In practice, both regimes are the same however.

Here is a rather good example of a current debate I'm having over the Greenhouse effect. [/b][/quote]That's also an example of you making some (terribly unfunny) fart jokes

It's not. Think of the people who starved in the Soviet Union, Poland, and Ukraine just to name a few. He mass murdered all across eastern Europe.

I recommend you do some research into Stalin and you'll see exactly what we're talking about.

I didn't say it did. If you notice, I said:

Best,
Double-J