429
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by rimu@piefed.social to c/world@lemmy.world

On more than 30 occasions, the United Nations Assembly has discussed the blockade against Cuba, which costs the island 5 billion dollars annually, according to some estimates. Every year the resolution is proposed and the whole world, through the vote of the absolute majority of the member countries of the United Nations General Assembly, has condemned the imperialist attitude of the United States towards Cuba.

edit: result of the vote: https://mastodon.nzoss.nz/system/cache/media_attachments/files/113/398/372/180/881/996/original/82c4d1f509e933fa.jpg

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] SpiceDealer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Being of Cuban descent, I really hope that this is the first step towards repealing that embargo once and forma all. ¡Vida y patria!

[-] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 117 points 2 days ago

There is no blockade of Cuba. It's an embargo. There are no military ships blowing up anyone trying to trade with Cuba.

[-] fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 21 points 2 days ago

Surprised you're not being downvoted for calling out this disinformation, usually it's all the rage on Lemmy

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 42 points 2 days ago

I can't believe they're still trying to "contain the communism" of Cuba

[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 58 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Blockading Cuba has never made sense. If communism is an inferior failed system that can't compete with the freedom of Capitalism (cue heavenly sunbeams and angel choirs) why not leave Cuba alone and let nature take its course?

[-] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago

There was a somewhat understandable reason initially; when the embargo was first started, it was because Cuba allowed the UUSR to use it as a forward base for missiles so they could reach the mainland US, which, understandably, the US wasn't very happy about

But ever since the fall of the USSR it's been absurd

[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Especially since we’ve kept a naval base/prison on a corner of the island the whole time, yay Murica.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 48 points 2 days ago

Noted socialist (/s) Hillary Clinton advocated for that very thing.

The real reason behind the embargo at this point is that it makes a small but important voting bloc of Cuban expats in Florida happy.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 27 points 2 days ago

That's really it. The start and end of why the embargo is even still there. It hurts both Cuba and (to a lesser extent) the United States. It benefits nobody, but there's some loudmouth Cuban expats who want you to believe Batista didn't have it coming.

[-] banshee@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Yep - it's one of the reasons Miami sees so much Trump support.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Because the US knows communism is not an inferior system. But to run the argument it never works they need to embargo it to then say "see it doesnt work".

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

This is why you get conspiracy theories that it was Cuba that assassinated President Kennedy: how else can we justify such extended sanctions when all the participants are long gone

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 121 points 3 days ago

Every year the resolution is proposed and the whole world, through the vote of the absolute majority of the member countries of the United Nations General Assembly, has condemned the imperialist attitude of the United States towards Cuba.

And just like every year, the vote will do nothing.

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 20 points 3 days ago

it'll add up to a hell of a lot of justified reparations when the US backs down.

[-] Kroxx@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago

US backs down

Does the US back down? We definitely double down

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 days ago

yeah, The US backs down.

they backed down in Vietnam, they backed down in iran, somalia, they backed down investigating the Saudi Arabian terrorists in 9/11(which is almost all of them), and the list goes on.

the US is not often gracious about backing down or wise enough to back down prudently, but they do back down.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You left out Afghanistan to be irrefutable, but…gestures at $3TRILLION bill with nothing to show for it.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Well, we successfully shifted all the wealth my generation will ever create over to ultra-rich Defense contractors.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago

is this that kind of vote the us can always overturn for some reason?

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

There are two tiers of UN. There’s the “I’m not a colonizer that’s willing to nuke people” tier, where the strongest outcome is “sternly worded email”; and then there’s the UN Permanent Security Council tier where you get an absolute veto power that cannot be questioned. The wiki is a very educating read

Edit: please tell me what part I am incorrect about if you disagree so hard that you downvote me out of the discussion.

[-] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 days ago

Isn't it just the permanent members of the UNSC with veto power?

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

Correct, I could have been more specific.

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 71 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Why is it normalized that one country can block/embargo/complicate/whatever-you-want-to-call-it another country to the point of severely affecting the lives of millions of people .... for what? because one country disagrees with the politics of another country?

If countries were able to do that, there would be no trade anywhere in the world.

Yet it's been completely normalized for the past six decades between the US and Cuba.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 56 points 3 days ago

Because the international order is based on economic and military might, not any sort of higher ideal or codified rules.

load more comments (24 replies)
[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

Countries have complicated trade for centuries. Free trade is a modern exception, not the historical rule.

And in principle, countries have as much right to restrict trade with Cuba as they do with Russia and Israel. It's the same principle that allows people to call for boycotts of Amazon and Starbucks. All of these things can affect the lives of millions, in an effort to bring about political change.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Syntha@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

Why shouldn't a country be able to decide not to trade with another country?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
[-] atro_city@fedia.io 13 points 2 days ago

Why won't the rest of the world just ignore the blockade together?

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago

When I was a kid, sweden did (IDK if they still do) so we had Cuba Cola there :-)

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 36 points 3 days ago

Legalize the import of Cuban cigars, and I will personally bring Cuba back into an age of prosperity.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
429 points (94.6% liked)

World News

38948 readers
1484 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS