Any socialism fans in the house? (Page 10/21)
williegoat OCT 09, 10:31 PM
I'm not a rum connoisseur, I'm just glad that someone got the reference.

It is a shame that Cuba is wasted on the communists. It has so much potential.
sourmash OCT 10, 09:20 AM
Randye, I'm not reading any valuable reference in your posts. You watched some TV in the Dom Rep. Ok. So if I've been to Ybor City does that make me an expert on cigar rolling or Cuban sandwiches? If you can't participate normally, just sit quietly and watch what the intent of the questions are leading to. Greedy Americans and vultures descended on Cuba but got kicked out making the move to communism a possibility that wasn't as likely prior to the decadence. America played a large role in the political shift to communism.

Now look at America. See the 30 trillion dollar debt looming? Isn't capitalism great? That's what we're selling. How well off does that make this empire? Look at our recent election. We resemble a banana republic. Could it be that while someone is blathering about hypothetical questions that the pattern in Cuba resembles America today?

'Cuber', being an island with limited resources, it's gotta trade to subsist. The Americans failed repeatedly to enslave, overthrow or starve the government out. AND THEY'RE STILL THERE DOING WHAT THEY DO. Being a small nation it doesn't take a lot to sustain the population, but could it exist in a Western type world without an influx of funds from outside sources? No. America failed at turning Cuba.

What if America is just going the route of Cuba?

[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 10-10-2021).]

82-T/A [At Work] OCT 10, 11:49 AM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

Randye, I'm not reading any valuable reference in your posts. You watched some TV in the Dom Rep. Ok. So if I've been to Ybor City does that make me an expert on cigar rolling or Cuban sandwiches? If you can't participate normally, just sit quietly and watch what the intent of the questions are leading to. Greedy Americans and vultures descended on Cuba but got kicked out making the move to communism a possibility that wasn't as likely prior to the decadence. America played a large role in the political shift to communism.




You have literally no idea what you're talking about, as usual.


Cuba "belonged" to the United States from as far back as the early 1900s. We were given control of Cuba after we won the Spanish / American War and signed the Treaty of Paris. We got Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and another country (which I forget), with Cuba as a protectorate. Cuba was a total mess, and we had every bit the authority to intervene. WHILE the United States was managing (and assisting in elections), Cuba became a huge tourist destination, and began to succeed.

There was HEAVY Communist influence from Russia, and while Cuba started to become very successful, the Communists highlighted the disparity between the wealthy and the poor... despite the fact that under prior rule, everyone was JUST poor.

There were multiple revolutions, the first of which turned the country Socialist, in which the United States no longer could really intervene.

That worked for a couple of years as the wealthy were heavily taxed and extorted to provide new construction and benefits to the poor... but after only a couple of years, there was mass unemployment, and the entire country fell into a depression and poverty.

It was at that point that there was yet ANOTHER revolution in which Che Guevarra (a wealthy Aristocrat from Argentina) invaded Cuba with the Castros.

As always, the United States attempts to support whichever side is the least radical, and that turned out to be Castro at the time... but you know how that worked out.


As it stands, the United States still has about as much ownership of Cuba as China has of Hong Kong, but no one really recognizes that, and I don't think we really care either. But your insinuation that the United States is to blame for the failures of Cuba are completely absurd. At multiple points in history, we attempted to prevent all-out Communism, but it wasn't to be. Russia was so heavily involved in Cuba due to its strategic location with the United States... and their partnership grew. Russia spent the equivalent to several trillion dollars (in today's money) in South and Central America, trying to destabilize those countries and turn them against the United States. Each time, the United States was forced to support whomever stood the greatest chance against the Communist party. In most cases, that meant we had to support Socialist parties.
sourmash OCT 10, 01:41 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
You have literally no idea what you're talking about, as usual.
Cuba "belonged" to the United States from as far back as the early 1900s. We were given control of Cuba after we won the Spanish / American War and signed the Treaty of Paris. We got Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and another country (which I forget), with Cuba as a protectorate. Cuba was a total mess, and we had every bit the authority to intervene. WHILE the United States was managing (and assisting in elections), Cuba became a huge tourist destination, and began to succeed.


So what? This has nothing to do with what I posted.


quote
There was HEAVY Communist influence from Russia,



You don't know what you're talking about as usual. The SOVIET UNION. Any dummy knows that the Soviets were communists.


quote
and while Cuba started to become very successful, the Communists highlighted the disparity between the wealthy and the poor... despite the fact that under prior rule, everyone was JUST poor

There were multiple revolutions, the first of which turned the country Socialist, in which the United States no longer could really intervene.

That worked for a couple of years as the wealthy were heavily taxed and extorted to provide new construction and benefits to the poor... but after only a couple of years, there was mass unemployment, and the entire country fell into a depression and poverty.

It was at that point that there was yet ANOTHER revolution in which Che Guevarra (a wealthy Aristocrat from Argentina) invaded Cuba with the Castros.

As always, the United States attempts to support whichever side is the least radical, and that turned out to be Castro at the time... but you know how that worked out.



Nothing you've posted disputes anything I posted. You totally left out the American led organized crime running the politicians and that both were victimizing the poor with scams and degerate sex shows.

Your pollyanna plastering DOES allude to how the population was being left behind by what you paint as successful tourism. Sex tourism was the norm.



quote
As it stands, the United States still has about as much ownership of Cuba as China has of Hong Kong, but no one really recognizes that, and I don't think we really care either. But your insinuation that the United States is to blame for the failures of Cuba are completely absurd.



And you have provided ZERO evidence for a rebuttal. I also said it was organized crime who was a major contributing factor. You are clearly just regurgitating what your family told you to think.


quote
At multiple points in history, we attempted to prevent all-out Communism, but it wasn't to be. Russia was so heavily involved in Cuba due to its strategic location with the United States... and their partnership grew. Russia spent the equivalent to several trillion dollars (in today's money) in South and Central America, trying to destabilize those countries and turn them against the United States. Each time, the United States was forced to support whomever stood the greatest chance against the Communist party. In most cases, that meant we had to support Socialist parties.



You don't even know the diff in Russia and our old ally, the Soviet Union. Talk about Cuba. The US is the leader indestabilzing countries. We do it for other nation's benefit. Not even ours anymore.

If you own a pet, change it's name to CLUE.
82-T/A [At Work] OCT 10, 02:07 PM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

You don't even know the diff in Russia and our old ally, the Soviet Union. Talk about Cuba. The US is the leader indestabilzing countries. We do it for other nation's benefit. Not even ours anymore.

If you own a pet, change it's name to CLUE.




Sigh... it seems like every single one of your arguments tends to focus around trying to "win" on vernacular semantics. I grew up in the 1980s... I'm well aware of the USSR/CCCP and the difference between an "empire" and the country of Russia. I'm referring to Russia because it's still the same **** ... and everyone here knows what I'm talking about.

Everything I said completely discounts your nonsense. Randy is wildly more intelligent than you are. If we took a poll, everyone here, including those on the left would flag you as basically a retard.
sourmash OCT 10, 02:35 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:

Sigh... it seems like every single one of your arguments tends to focus around trying to "win" on vernacular semantics. I grew up in the 1980s... I'm well aware of the USSR/CCCP and the difference between an "empire" and the country of Russia. I'm referring to Russia because it's still the same **** ... and everyone here knows what I'm talking about.



Said the guy trying to win an argument he started.
To people in your demographic intelligence capacity group you probably make sense. The rest of us know Russia is not at all like the Soviet Union and empire. We know that your blending of not so related tems indicates your low level of understanding.

This is exactly like a newb musician trying to tell a seasoned performer what he knows isnt correct because 'your feelings'.

This is also just like 2 days ago when you didn't know Pepsi started the Pepsi Generation for Boomers.


quote
Everything I said completely discounts your nonsense. Randy is wildly more intelligent than you are. If we took a poll, everyone here, including those on the left would flag you as basically a retard.


And I'm more intelligent than you. So what? Everything you post to me has to center around you and your juvenile insults.

You didn't post 1 item to refute my assertions. In fact you supported it in part by admitting the vast majority were victimized by poverty while the elite prospered under our guidance.

[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 10-10-2021).]

82-T/A [At Work] OCT 10, 03:00 PM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

Said the guy trying to win an argument he started.
To people in your demographic intelligence capacity group you probably make sense. The rest of us know Russia is not at all like the Soviet Union and empire. We know that your blending of not so related tems indicates your low level of understanding.

This is exactly like a newb musician trying to tell a seasoned performer what he knows isnt correct because 'your feelings'.

This is also just like 2 days ago when you didn't know Pepsi started the Pepsi Generation for Boomers.

And I'm more intelligent than you. So what? Everything you post to me has to center around you and your juvenile insults.

You didn't post 1 item to refute my assertions. In fact you supported it in part by admitting the vast majority were victimized by poverty while the elite prospered under our guidance.





So sad... I'm not sure anyone understands what you're trying to say half the time you post. I have to allow myself to realize I can't help you, and accept your posts more for their outlandish entertainment value.
sourmash OCT 10, 03:11 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
So sad... I'm not sure anyone understands what you're trying to say half the time you post. I have to allow myself to realize I can't help you, and accept your posts more for their outlandish entertainment value.



Again, you're making this about you. You haven't posted 1 item that refutes a statement about Cuba. You supported my assertion of victimizing the vast number there who were poor while elevating the few.
82-T/A [At Work] OCT 10, 03:36 PM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

Again, you're making this about you. You haven't posted 1 item that refutes a statement about Cuba. You supported my assertion of victimizing the vast number there who were poor while elevating the few.




I have literally no idea what you're talking about.
williegoat OCT 10, 03:46 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:

I have literally no idea what you're talking about.


It's almost as if Furgal and Threedog had a child.