Havana-Miami-Washington events and arguments and their impact on Cuba
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Brent Scowcroft, off the reservation
…national security advisor to the first President Bush, thanks to Steve Clemons, The Washington Note, who asked the question and recorded it.
Note: This video has apparently been removed from YouTube. Here is what Scowcroft said:
“My answer on Cuba is Cuba is not a foreign policy question. Cuba is a domestic issue. In foreign policy, the embargo makes no sense. It doesn’t do anything. It's quite clear we cannot starve Cuba to death. We learned that when the Soviet stopped subsidizing Cuba and they didn’t collapse. It’s a domestic issue.”]
I don't think any Republican realist is going to speak up for the embargo. If I remember correctly even Nixon spoke of re-evaluating it in his last book before he passed away.
I can say that as a realist we do have convictions - that policies and actions be determined by the national interest. If the government's role is to provide security for its citizens then the only moral course of action for the state is to pursue a strategy that benefits said citizens.
Its just the facist neo-cons that may (i stress may) support the embargo.
The same neo-cons who see the world map as a "RISK game" and want to expand US "influence" (code for imperial power) across the world, starting with Cuba... (and iran).
that has to be the most ignorant comment I ever read. I understand why people support the embargo...for the same reasons that people supported sanctions against the apartheid government of South Africa.
The reasons are noble but the thinking is faulty...well it's noble on some people's part for others it is pure unadulterated hatred for the Castro Bros. Only a true utter moron would think that the neo-cons think that the key to world domination is Cuba. Neo-cons are democratic crusaders, idealists drunk on Wilsonian ideal of imposing a system of government on people that may not be ready for it.
When bush I and regan folk say how stupid our policy toward Cuba is, it shows something.
ReplyDeleteThe Bush II Neo-con hawks, like the traitor called Rice, and the historic exile are the only ones left.
where's the video?
ReplyDeleteIt is no longer available. Why?
ReplyDeleteso I guess that means he never had the courage of his convictions to act when he was in government.
ReplyDeleteoh yeah, that's right, Scowcroft is a "realist" -- he has no convictions...
I don't think any Republican realist is going to speak up for the embargo. If I remember correctly even Nixon spoke of re-evaluating it in his last book before he passed away.
ReplyDeleteI can say that as a realist we do have convictions - that policies and actions be determined by the national interest. If the government's role is to provide security for its citizens then the only moral course of action for the state is to pursue a strategy that benefits said citizens.
Its just the facist neo-cons that may (i stress may) support the embargo.
ReplyDeleteThe same neo-cons who see the world map as a "RISK game" and want to expand US "influence" (code for imperial power) across the world, starting with Cuba... (and iran).
that has to be the most ignorant comment I ever read. I understand why people support the embargo...for the same reasons that people supported sanctions against the apartheid government of South Africa.
ReplyDeleteThe reasons are noble but the thinking is faulty...well it's noble on some people's part for others it is pure unadulterated hatred for the Castro Bros. Only a true utter moron would think that the neo-cons think that the key to world domination is Cuba. Neo-cons are democratic crusaders, idealists drunk on Wilsonian ideal of imposing a system of government on people that may not be ready for it.