Should the US maintain its economic embargo against Cuba?
Debate Rounds (2)
SHOULD THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MAINTAIN AN ECONOMIC EMBARGO AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA?
Round 1 is a debating round, not just an acceptance round.
I am AGAINST the economic embargo against Cuba.
I am debating against it. The economic embargo against Cuba is unjust and inefficient. The main primary principle of the embargo was to make Cuba adopt democracy. So far, it has failed. The embargo was initiated in 1960 and after all this time it hasn't worked. The embargo has been unsuccessful and unfair. The USA still trades with countries such as Vietnam and China, similar nations in terms of political systems and they have human rights abuses records but still, the US won't trade with Cuba but will trade with other human right abusers who are no different than Cuba. It doesn't seem right. The embargo harms the people of Cuba, not the Government as it was intended to do. Cubans could be available to purchase goods such as technology goods, food, medicine etc. that is only available in the USA. I quote from Amnesty International "treatments for children and young people with bone cancer and antiretroviral drugs used to treat children with HIV/AIDS were not readily available with the embargo in place because they were commercialized under US patents." They are restricted because of an old cold war embargo that is now outdated and ineffective.
 Annual Report: Cuba 2011 - www.amnesty.org.uk
The embargo found on the Cuban island by the United States is fair in the sense that they were willing to actively allow Russian nuclear warheads in there nation and help fight the United States in the event of the cold war turning violent. This all occurred under the leadership of Fidel Castro who while his health is reported to be declining his brother Raul stills operates the country and is easily influenced by his brother who still has large amounts of hatred towards the United States, if we end the embargo, the Cuban area can just intensify there military presence around the world and while tensions continue increasing between president Vladimir Putin who has ruled the Russian country as if it were the U.S.S.R for 16 years and the west he has proven he is willing to attack and store missiles in nations such as Iraq, he has started bombing Homs, Syria and is near killing Americans in the Syrian borders as peace keepers. There is reason to believe that Putin will store missiles in areas that are in range of the United States and this would include Cuba. The arguement for trading with China goes back to the open door policy of Theodore Roosevelt and his administration to open China to the west, arguing that trading with China is the same thing as Cuba is wrong, we economically prosper from trade with China however Cuba is in more deficit in terms of the United States than Puerto Rico and Greece, both of which in the year of 2015 have collapsed. It is not inhumane treatment and Cuba is fully able to create there own screening technology and bacteria killing medicine.
Thank you cantget300 for joining my debate.
Under Barack Obama's administration, the US have started to begin relation ties with Cuba by opening an embassy in Havana, Cuba. This shows that the Cubans are willing to co-operate with future diplomatic and trade negotiations, showing that they are willing to regain ties with the US. I quote from your argument "The embargo found on the Cuban island by the United States is fair in the sense that they were willing to actively allow Russian nuclear warheads in there nation and help fight the United States in the event of the cold war turning violent." While this is a good argument, before the Soviets placed missiles in Cuba, the US with NATO support, placed Jupiter ballistic missiles in Turkey and Italy which were capable of striking the USSR, the USA had provoked the USSR in placing missles of similar strength and range near one of their allies. We need to remember that the embargo also harms USA but which you said I quote from your argument "we economically prosper from trade with China however Cuba is in more deficit in terms." The US economy has estimated to lose up to $1.4 billion to $4.5 billion dollars per year from sales that could be made there and that it is not all about their previous actions. Countries do change throughout the years and many countries changed after 1991. I quote from your argument "There is reason to believe that Putin will store missiles in areas that are in range of the United States and this would include Cuba." Russia, without needing to position missiles on countries, already has the ability to strike the USA and almost anywhere in the world with nuclear missiles, not to mention nuclear submarines, so there is no real need for the Russian Government to position missiles on Cuba, not to mention the international outcry and condemning that would follow after. Also, Cuba is well aware of its previous cold war history and would not want to bring even more sanctions upon itself. If Russia is so determined in starting another WW3 or another Cold War, that is one way to do it. Also, Cuba can no longer survive and its people are suffering greatly, as one Cuban exile living in the USA simply said "there are no dogs or cats in Cuba because the poor starving people have eaten them all." This clearly shows the extent of Cuban poverty, which is most likely spread throughout the country. Another point I would like to make, is the fact that if we lift the Cuba, we can pressurise Cuba to make changes and enact laws to ensure Cuba follows through as a safe and prosperous country in order to ensure the country's Government can co-operate with the rest of the world. Yet another point, the Cuban military power has sharply decreased with the collpase of the Soviet Union in the 90's, meaning Cuba's military power is far less than it previously was at the height of the Cold War and budget cuts are cutting the military so the might of Cuba is falling. We also need to consider is thet Cuba is no longer regarded as a country that 'sponsors terrorism' by the DoD. This means that the US believes it is no longer a threat to the US. I also understand why Cuba may feel 'hatred' towards the US state, with over 600 CIA assassination attempts against Fidel, it is most understandable.
 "Oppose Unilateral Econonic Sanctions" www.uschamber.com
 "Russia Nuclear Missile Range Capability" goo.gl/1WM8IZ
 "Misconceptions About Cuba" http://www.iammyownreporter.com...
 "Cuba Removed From State Sponsor of Terrorism" http://goo.gl...
 "Castro: Profile of A Great Survivor" http://news.bbc.co.uk...
cantget300 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AtkinsonCameron 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: I voted better conduct for Con because Pro forfeited a round. I voted that I agree with Con after the debate and that he made more convincing arguments because he presented solid evidence that Cuba's military does not pose a threat to US interests and that technology has made Russian nuclear missiles in Cuba unnecessary.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.