The Instigator
FirinMahLazor
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
BlackMask
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

Resolved: The United States Should Normalize Relations With Cuba

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/21/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,445 times Debate No: 8732
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

FirinMahLazor

Con

We negate. Resolved: That the United States should normalize relations with Cuba.

Contention 1: Normalizing relations with Cuba means that U.S. companies will begin developing currently untapped oil fields in the region

Currently, the embargo prohibits U.S. companies from drilling, which stops any development from occurring at all because as stated by The International Herald Tribune only the United States has the needed deep-water drilling technology and close-by crude oil refining capacity.

Because U.S. companies are interested in developing the oil, lifting the embargo would mean drilling in Cuba. According to Dr. Jonathan Alvarado, Professor of Political Science at the University of Nebraska, "[In the 2006 U.S.-Cuban Energy Summit in Mexico City] American oil interests [demonstrated] significant interest the development of Cuba's oil." This drilling would be drastically harmful to both the environment and the economy of the United States.

According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, taking into account the human error, barge collisions, explosions, pipeline corrosion, hurricanes, equipment blowouts, mechanical failure, and several other factors, the onset of more offshore drilling in Cuba would inevitably result in 22 to 46 major oil spills.

These spills would cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars. The ThinkQuest Library Researcher analyzes previous major oil spills and finds that the average spill was around 8 million tons, and while this not only destroys the biodiversity of the region affected off the shores of Cuba, as stated by the Environmental Defense Fund, it also destroys the U.S. economy. The New York Times explains that because of Cuba's intricate and delicate network of reefs and biodiversity, it is uniquely harder to clean up oil spills in its waters. Because of the hiring of contractors to clean up the mess, the losses from a decrease in tourism revenue, the fees and fines imposed by state agencies, the cost of litigation, and environmental damages, data from the Environmental Protection Agency indicates that the cost to the U.S. economy to clean just one of these spills would be approximately 596 billion dollars. Multiply that number by the inevitable 22-46 major spills and you have a figure in the trillions and a U.S. economy pushed further into debt and economic crisis that is a policy imperative to avoid.

Contention 2: Normalizing relations would reinforce the class divide created by the dual economy system in Cuba

Eduardo Castillo of the Associated Press explains the structure of Cuba's economy: "Cuba has two primary currencies, [the dollar and peso]. Tourist businesses [use] U.S. dollars and charge U.S. prices, while the [Cuban] peso [is] maintained for [internal] everyday transactions." In this dual-economy system, the dollar is king – it has a much stronger purchasing power than the Cuban peso, which is not valuable enough to be used outside of the centralized Cuban economy.

The Cuban government has begun to introduce modest reforms to try and revalue the peso, which would eliminate the dual economy. However, this cannot be done at the same time the embargo is lifted, because as Castillo explains, such salary reform "has to be done in phases."

According to the New York Times, were the U.S. to lift the embargo, the drastic flood of dollars would re-entrench the dual economy and make it impossible to rectify.

The problem is that these dual economies create a class divide between Cubans who have access to the dollar, and those that don't. Cubans that are allowed to work in the tourist industry get access to dollars via tips from American tourists, while other professions do not. According to the Atlantic Magazine, a waiter makes more money in tips in one night than a doctor does in one month, because of the dollar's purchasing power.

This dual economy is bad because it creates two classes; the poor lower class that can only access the Cuban Peso, and the rich upper class which has access to the U.S. dollar. The issue is that the Communist government only allows the rich and those with political connections to work in tourism and thus get dollars, while paying all others in pesos, according to The Journal of Latin American Politics. This means that the poor are systematically excluded from participating in the dollar economy, and forced into a lower class from which they cannot escape.

Jaime Suchlicki, Director of the Institute of Cuban-American Studies, explains that "As class and social distinctions bred by the dual economy intensify, crime, corruption, and narcotics trafficking within and via Cuba have proliferated. The law no longer has much value because if you live by the law you cannot feed your family."

Foreign Policy Research Institute scholar Rensselaer Lee explains, "Cuba occupies a favored strategic position from a drug trafficking perspective. Traffickers' use of Cuba to smuggle drug cargoes to Florida is well documented."

It is because lifting the embargo would create massive oil spills, and re-entrench the dual economy that is not only systematically excluding the poor lower class in Cuba causing them to turn to illicit activities that we urge a negative vote.
BlackMask

Pro

First off, I'd really like to thank my opponent " the instigator" for posting such an excellent topic. Apart from the other random debates that get posted i constantly come to question why can't we have more topics from the NFL? Anyway, it doesn't matter. Once again, thanks and let's debate.

I stand in firm affirmation that the United States should Normalize its relations with Cuba. I have a few main contentions. As well as a value premise and framework/ along with addressing and refuting all of the opps. contention i'll finish up with a nice summary and conclusion.
Here's my points:
1. The perceived threat from the Soviet Union and communism no longer exist urging communication between the two nations
A. the US caused the Cuban revolution by backing a dictator government.
B. Since the US was the cause of the issues, the only available superpower at that time was the Soviet Union

2. Normalized trade relations will be good for US businesses

A. Cuban Nationals have an untapped market for American goods and services
B imported fruits and vegetables will be cheaper than importing them from South America

3. Normal trade relations and normalized diplomatic relations will have a positive military benefit

A. U.S ships would have another port
B US forces would have a place to establish a new southern command.

4) Fidel is no longer a threat to the United States. By giving the cold shoulder to Cuba we are still conveying that we are a threat, and that is not necessary. Barack Obama sent a new message when he went and conversed with Raul Castro. We will accomplish nothing by ignoring them.
5) Opening the Trade Embargo With Cuba could help stabilize our economy. Cuba is a very lucrative nation and establishing trade with them. We need to be in a workable relationship with Cuba. The time for hatred is over.

6) Finally, with common sense; tension being eased between two rivals will help other countries understand that tension between any country in current times is not the solution to unlocking a prominent future in the current times of crippling economic statuses. Sun Tzu once said "that the greatest enemies make the best allies." Personally, we need allies in these soon to be troubling times.

The value premise that i promote that should sway a judges decision would be INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE. Justice that has not only been plaguing the globe for years, but for decades. Even before the cold war tensions due to communist influence has caused a barrier between our countries. If we extend a change in this manner to address previous faults not only will both nations be urged to promote social tranquility but, we could work together to solve this problem of a dying economy.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Now let's move onto my opponent's contentions which are only that drilling in Cuba will hurt the environment and our government. the second contention is that with the introduction of the u.s. dollar we'll be hurting initiating a class divide

1. First off the contention about drilling is really puzzling. Why would we be hurting our economy if we'll be gaining profit from drilling and getting oil? HOW in the world does that hurt our economy? My opponent specifies that the environment will be crippled due to offshore drilling which will rob the us of rehabilitation projects to protect aquatic zones. Unfortunately i have two retorts to this. According to the Christian Science Monitor along with a recorded initiation from the secretary of relations and interactions US oil companies have had no intention of drilling in offshore deposits of the Cuban cost regardless of the circumstances. According to researchers and scientists representing the NOA partners (National oil association) in 1987 and 2001 oil deposits even off the cost have limited quantity. Only initializing a limited supply of oil even if the US wanted to drill off the coast. SO LOOK, the US would be wasting money in the first place drilling off the coast because the costs of starting projects outweigh the final profits. SO we have no intentions of drilling there at all.
1a.) now the second thing i was going to say apart from the US not being interested whatsoever in oil deposits off the Cuban coast is that offshore drilling currently off the Cuban coast is posing no problem. That citation that you provided from the "thinkquest researcher and NY times," is about to be disproved. From the IERA (international Environmental Regulation Association) in 2008 head researcher Vincent Card concluded that the cause of LIMITED loss of aquatic life and aquatic dead zones was from accumulated fertilizers getting sucked up by clouds then dumped offshore. 2 points back this thesis up. NUMBER ONE; the deadzones occurred in cluster formation; which means that it only occured in random spots off the coast. Some were randomly deposited very close to CUBAN drilling sights offshore. NUMBER TWO that backs this up is the red tides that occured off the cuban coast which can only occur due to chemical imbalance that kills aquatic life..............So look offshore drilling isn't the problem even if some random company like ARCO decides to drill (even though they aren't)

{in a nutshell there goes your first contention}

2. My opponent's second contention is equally puzzling due to 3 reasons. Number one is that majority of my opponent's author's actually have disagreed with my opponent. Number two is that the dollar in our market is greatly losing it's value so even if our economies linked their wouldn't be a Major difference in class structure. Number 3 is simply that with common fact this 2nd contention can be defeated.

-Okay so listen up, my opponent stated "Eduardo Castillo of the Associated Press explains the structure of Cuba's economy-the dollar is the king"
Eduardo Castillo in an article 2 months ago stated that the dollar value has decreased balancing the decree and difference between it and the peso. Again about the question on how the dollar gets into Cuba; majority of us tourists are banned from the country.(don't believe me. look at this: http://www.ibike.org... ) SO i think my opponent has been lying; there has been a MAJOR DECREASE IN US TOURISTS in cuba so there's been limited circulation of the us dollar which hasn't offered any hierarchy in currency making the peso still the dominant force.

-my opponent said "Jaime Suchlicki, Director of the Institute of Cuban-American Studies, explains that "As class and social distinctions bred by the dual economy intensify, crime, corruption, and narcotics trafficking within and via Cuba have proliferated. The law no longer has much value because if you live by the law you cannot feed your family."
Now that same Jaime Suchlicki said about a month ago as well that dominance in Cuba has never been ruled by the currency but by the people. which meant that in the decades before this social imbalance has been due to limited government control.

So as anyone can see these 2 of my opponent's authors actually disagree with my opponent. My opponent's final author says this [Foreign Policy Research Institute scholar Rensselaer Lee explains, "Cuba occupies a favored strategic position from a drug trafficking perspective. Traffickers' use of Cuba to smuggle drug cargoes to Florida is well documented." ] now still this can be disproved with common sense.

LOOK i think my opponent is trying to fit another contention here but failed. I think he's trying to say that drugs will leak into Florida if we seek peace to the current tensions. Unfortunately, border regulations won't change no matter the circumstance. Look at Mexico and Canada (that's my proof by the way)

****IN CONCLUSION I WANT PEACE AND COMMUNICATION WITH CUBA NO MATTER WHAT MY OPPONENT WANTS TENSIONS TO CONTINUE AND MORE PEOPLE TO STAY MAD AT EACH OTHER. I DON"T THINK IT'S THAT HA
Debate Round No. 1
FirinMahLazor

Con

FirinMahLazor forfeited this round.
BlackMask

Pro

So i guess i win.....
Debate Round No. 2
FirinMahLazor

Con

FirinMahLazor forfeited this round.
BlackMask

Pro

i stand corrected
Debate Round No. 3
FirinMahLazor

Con

You're such a horrid debater that I decided to not engage. It'd be a headache.

This website's a joke
BlackMask

Pro

thanks. yea it is. i do it for practice though.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
FirinMahLazorBlackMaskTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Crazy4Steelers07 8 years ago
Crazy4Steelers07
FirinMahLazorBlackMaskTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by BlackMask 8 years ago
BlackMask
FirinMahLazorBlackMaskTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07