US boycott of Cuba: starving the people to bring the regime to its knees.

[mihamarkic@mastodon.social]

@EugestShirley @royaards This is not new, US has done it before the Orange as well.

[connynasch@mastodon.social]

@royaards I am so angry at all the shit the bloody Ammies are causing, also that the rest of the world seems enormously uninterested in what horrors are going on! Woe betide the US and Israel, the next generation will hopefully make you pay.

[jesperharton@mastodon.social]

@royaards disgusting, and now they want to indict the 94 year old Raul Castro, for what? To justify another Venezuela operation. I am not buying it, bring the whole White House administration to the ICC, they are criminals all of them.

[gvs@rebelbase.site]

@royaards deed ze destijds met Irak ook, met onze medewerking en weinig weerstand.

Ik keur het grondig af, maar ik ga communisme allerminst verdedigen

[divverent@misskey.de]

@royaards@newsie.social Sadly that is what economic sanctions always do. Same against russia.

Nobody really believes sanctions will make putin stop the war. Sanctions just mean the rich elite in russia will take even more from the poor so they can retain their wealth. Because those people, they'll get no little bit poorer from sanctions. They already know how to steal from everyone else. That's how they got rich in the first place. So they'll just do more of it.

So yes, economic sanctions feel less bloody than weapons - after all you're not pulling any trigger. But economic sanctions primarily make civilians starve, get sick and die (hoping hunger or disease will make those civilians will eventually rise up against their rulers) - whereas weapons primarily kill low-level soldiers, which then forces the rulers to draft more and more people from the general population, of course usually the poor ones, so ultimately the same group of people dies. When what we really need is bombs on the kremlin and the führerbunker in Gelendzhik.

And yeah, same applies to US vs Cuba.

[decapitae@mastodon.social]

@royaards Nobody voted for this - remove the criminals from office!

[mihamarkic@mastodon.social]

@xs4me2 @royaards Cuba has been under US blockage for what, half a century or more? And it also baffles me that everybody is fine with it.

[mihamarkic@mastodon.social]

@divVerent @royaards While you are right about the blockade effects on population, there is a difference between Cuba and Russia. One is trying to survive while the other is wagging an actual offensive full scale war against a European country. So a blockade that hinders weapons manufacturing in Russia might make sense, yet it's very weak on this aspect - even recent missiles contain a lot of western made components.

[ingridausol@norden.social]

@royaards

Soooo brutal. Mir fehlen echt die Worte ..

[divverent@misskey.de]

@mihamarkic@mastodon.social @royaards@newsie.social Precisely.

I was using the example to show that what the US is doing is actual murder. They are actively killing Cubans - without having been attacked by them.

EU sanctions against Ukraine are indeed a different kind of thing. They may not be effective enough, but ultimately they're a weapon too - an economic weapon. The same kind of people are killed by it, so it'd be hypocritical to support sanctions while being against weapons shipments on the grounds "but these weapons KILL".

As such, what the US are doing is not much different from actually launching missiles to hit Cuba. If one is justified, so is the other.

The only difference is how one feels. That civilians in Cuba die because the government does not distribute the little that is left so regular low end citizens can get it is, after all, seen as their fault, not the US's. So the US have no blood on their hands, right? Wrong. The US knew the blockade will have precisely this effect, and thus are morally precisely at the same point as if they had launched missiles.