Adios Fidel

Hahaha... that little detail doesn't matter. Blaming the CIA is an all-purpose excuse. Sorta like blaming everything on Bush. Originally Posted by lustylad

As a matter of fact when I noticed that BL didn't blame "Bush" (or Cheney for that matter) I thought that it might be a step in the "right" direction that he was moving away from the knee-jerk response to all things bad. But may be to him the passing of Fidel was not "bad."

.

As a matter of fact when I noticed that BL didn't blame "Bush" (or Cheney for that matter) I thought that it might be a step in the "right" direction that he was moving away from the knee-jerk response to all things bad. But may be to him the passing of Fidel was not "bad." Originally Posted by LexusLover

probably not if he doesn't seem to understand that Batista and the Castros are simply the same brutal dictator just one on the right and the other on the left. of course, the Castros were the typical commie hypocrites, espousing their egalitarian utopia crap while living high off the hog on the labors of the people. bahahahaaa

it's like my brother says .. "i'd rather have a fascist look me in the eye and tell me how it's really going to be, rather than a communist looking me in the eye and lying about how great it's going to be"

VIVE CUBA LIBRE!

it's like my brother says .. "i'd rather have a fascist look me in the eye and tell me how it's really going to be, rather than a communist looking me in the eye and lying about how great it's going to be"
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

... the markets are up and consumer spending is as well.

Essentially the two ends of the "consumer" spectrum are optimistic.

In this country, but not in Cuba.

It's reported there the "citizens" are awaiting instructions on how and where to express their regards with respect to Fidel's death. The current Cuban "administration" has been in charge for about 10 years. The same would have been true in this country if Trump would not have one the election. Except it would have been for at least another four years and possibly eight.

Raul is 85.

just another corrupt thug who lived in style ontop the blood of many while the rest of the people suffered trapped in a time warp of 1955

black lives matter is praising brother el commandante for, among other things, sheltering the number one most wanted killer on the fbi list

just another corrupt thug who lived in style ontop the blood of many while the rest of the people suffered trapped in a time warp of 1955... Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Are you talking about Raul? He's been in charge for about 10 years.

He's only 5 years younger than Fidel.

its about dammmm time LOL i Wished the CIA focused more on killing him instead of Escobar


they tried 600+ times to kill him and Failed LOOOOOOL

its about dammmm time LOL i Wished the CIA focused more on killing him instead of Escobar


they tried 600+ times to kill him and Failed LOOOOOOL Originally Posted by ArabianGoddess

You don't actually believe that do you?

Fidel duped the people talked democracy then went communist.

Fidel duped the people talked democracy then went communist. Originally Posted by bamscram

Raul is pretty good at it too.

He just bamboozled the "community organizer" extraordinaire...

... aka Harvard Law School professor .....

As bad as Fidel was, Raul is actually worse.
Almost impossible to tell if he was "worse" or not. He was completely supportive of big brother, and I don't think anyone besides the two of them can truly tell when Raul was acting of his own accord and when he was carrying out Fidel's intentions. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Fidel was actually well educated, which helped.*

Probably better educated than most of the posters in this forum.
Almost certainly true--just read some of the posters on here. It doesn't excuse what he did, but the man was educated. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Don't get me wrong, Castro was a total dictator who refused to see how he had destroyed a once great island Originally Posted by BigLouie

He was certainly a dictator, but "destroy a once great island"? I guess that depends who you were in the Batista era. Yes, Cuba was a "great island" IF you were a rich, visiting tourist, a made man, or a white Cuban of enough Spanish lineage. If you were not, it wasn't quite so good. It was a very segregated country and if you were black or had too much Native blood the only "great" parts you saw tended to be the life lived by the others.

Castro played upon that inequity very well--he gave the common people greatly improved health care and education, and used the wealth of the upper class Spanish blood and foreigners to pay for much of it. Obviously it was not a sustainable model, but to think he was universally despised by the Cubans is not an accurate picture.

On balance he was more evil than good, and he tolerated no dissent. Many who fought with him in the mountains rejected his views after the revolution succeeded because as with many despots he said one thing when the revolutionary and did another after winning. But to compare him to the North Korean nut case is too extreme in the other direction. He was despotic, a murderer, and played 50 years of US presidents for fools--but he was neither insane nor without some positive achievements.

I sincerely hope that after the demise of little brother, Cuba does NOT become a political and economic clone of the US.

He was certainly a dictator, but "destroy a once great island"? I guess that depends who you were in the Batista era. Yes, Cuba was a "great island" IF you were a rich, visiting tourist, a made man, or a white Cuban of enough Spanish lineage. If you were not, it wasn't quite so good. It was a very segregated country and if you were black or had too much Native blood the only "great" parts you saw tended to be the life lived by the others.

Castro played upon that inequity very well--he gave the common people greatly improved health care and education, and used the wealth of the upper class Spanish blood and foreigners to pay for much of it. Obviously it was not a sustainable model, but to think he was universally despised by the Cubans is not an accurate picture.

On balance he was more evil than good, and he tolerated no dissent. Many who fought with him in the mountains rejected his views after the revolution succeeded because as with many despots he said one thing when the revolutionary and did another after winning. But to compare him to the North Korean nut case is too extreme in the other direction. He was despotic, a murderer, and played 50 years of US presidents for fools--but he was neither insane nor without some positive achievements.

I sincerely hope that after the demise of little brother, Cuba does NOT become a political and economic clone of the US. Originally Posted by Old-T

then you are saying post Castros, you want Cuba to remain a communist nation?
Why would you oppose more democracy and open markets in Cuba post Castro??

you sound like a libtard commie Old-Wheezer

Almost impossible to tell if he was "worse" or not. He was completely supportive of big brother, and I don't think anyone besides the two of them can truly tell when Raul was acting of his own accord and when he was carrying out Fidel's intentions. Originally Posted by Old-T

If Raul and Che had been given free rein, more people would have been slaughtered, Old-THUMPER.

He was certainly a dictator, but "destroy a once great island"? I guess that depends who you were in the Batista era. Yes, Cuba was a "great island" IF you were a rich, visiting tourist, a made man, or a white Cuban of enough Spanish lineage. If you were not, it wasn't quite so good. It was a very segregated country and if you were black or had too much Native blood the only "great" parts you saw tended to be the life lived by the others.

Castro played upon that inequity very well--he gave the common people greatly improved health care and education, and used the wealth of the upper class Spanish blood and foreigners to pay for much of it. Obviously it was not a sustainable model, but to think he was universally despised by the Cubans is not an accurate picture.

On balance he was more evil than good, and he tolerated no dissent. Many who fought with him in the mountains rejected his views after the revolution succeeded because as with many despots he said one thing when the revolutionary and did another after winning. But to compare him to the North Korean nut case is too extreme in the other direction. He was despotic, a murderer, and played 50 years of US presidents for fools--but he was neither insane nor without some positive achievements.

I sincerely hope that after the demise of little brother, Cuba does NOT become a political and economic clone of the US. Originally Posted by Old-T

Every Cuban I've ever known who hated Castro had some story to tell about how Fidel was horrible and stole their families land/business/property but never thought for a second about the other 99% of the peasants living on nothing. Fidel was a horrible, murderous dictator, no doubt, but Batista was no great hero of anything except the politically connected rich people who stole everything they could get, also.

Cuba is as fucked up as any third world dictatorship, and always will be, though I hope prostitution will thrive there, of course.