I think thatâs when they started putting a reverse gear into tanks.
5 Likes
Ye did, but made a show of yourselves in the last century.
When you achieve as much as we did, itâs hard to keep the motivation going.
2 Likes
[quote=âSidney, post:420, topic:23439, full:trueâ]
Please state a list of sources which are acceptable to your fantasy version of history.
Remember, youâve already ruled the following as illegitimate: The Guardian, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Vox, and anything from the âliberal mediaâ. The âliberal mediaâ encompassing everything from sources other than Fox News, the Murdoch press, Breitbart and alt-right blogs, of course. [/quote]
I donât have time to respond to the rest of your drivel at present, due to work constraints, but this at least merits a response.
Your entire worldview is based on left wing media. A left wing media that is owned and controlled by six enormous corporations. I am sure the irony of that is lost on you.
I get minimal inputs to my worldview at this stage from media owned by these 6 corporations, so that excludes ABC, NBC, CNN and Fox. I am not interested in reading sources that feed you âentertainmentâ in the place of actual unbiased news and commentary.
I read from a variety of independent media sources and mainly from blogs written by free thinking people like myself.
2 Likes
Cowenâs
1 Like
Getting back on topic, and Iâm sure a youthful Fidel would be proud of all this attention from Irish intellectuals, as he strolled around his fatherâs plantation carrying his copy of Mein Kampf.
This is actually a credible left wing source, that actually examines factual data, refutes made up data and fairytales people like to believe because it said it in the paper. It destroys the main myths about Castroâs Cuba. To save you the bother reading it, here are the main points from the article:
Since Castro took over in 1959, Cubaâs economic growth rate has been 0.9% of GDP per capita, roughly half that of the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean (that included a lot of very poor nations).
Any impact of the US embargo should have been offset by massive Soviet subsidies.
Reliable information on health, education and income distribution is simple not available (surprise, the govt control it all, like everything else), but there is ample evidence that Cuba has become more unequal in the past 20 years, and increasingly RACIST.
Finally, the punch line: âThere is a duty to tell the truth, and this duty also applies to the leftâ
"
1 Like
but they had free water
1 Like
But the smiles on those little Cuban peoples faces?
In fairness mother nature and the timing of the German invasion gave him a bit of a dig out
And lend lease
the yanks were supplying the Russian simpletons with tanks and jeeps as fast as they could drive them straight at the Germans and get blown up
I wasnât aware the Guardian or the Irish Times were owned by enormous corporations. Perhaps your definition of âenormous corporationâ is different to mine.
Are you hacking my computer? Itâs amazing how you think you know where I get my worldview from. And some of you rural right-wingers have claimed I think Iâm the one that thinks they âknow it allâ. 
I read and watch a variety of sources myself, from all angles. Thatâs a large part of how I know where my worldview lies.
By your own admission, you rule out a huge swathe of media and anything from what you consider to be a âliberal sourceâ in informing your worldview. Thatâs not an informed worldview. Thatâs an echo chamber.
Iâm sure the irony of that is lost on you.
In fairness to the yanks they would have sent an endless supply if they thought it would have kept them out of the war. The Japs saw to that one though.
Yes, have you not read this thread?
Castro, he was an UNELECTED DICTATOR. The USA didnât force him to be that for over 50 years and hand over power to his brother. Just blame the USA aye.
This is great.
Castro was not elected but Sidney said he had all the support justified for ruling for 50 years uninterrupted. Your dislike of Pinochet vs Castro is clear, one styled himself as a socialist so you like him. Both committed heinous crimes, both ruled undemocratically, but you like one. I could say for âbalanceâ fair play to Pinochet for handing over power democratically at the end - but Iâm not looking for âbalanceâ for Pinochet. The only one looking for balance with an unelected dictator is you.
What does Milton Friedman and Maggie Thatcherâs 80s support for Pinochet have to do with the here and now? Pinochet died in 2006, please find me loads of world leaders at the time who lined up to support him. By that time he was long an international disgrace.
Niall Ferguson, that is grasping ffs. He is an historian, not a current head of state like Michael D or a Western leader like Trudeau.
This is a fantastic bit of revisionist history. Much like your parsing of language earlier to try and avoid your blatant hypocrisy for criticising one undemocratic dictator over another, you use the term âinvitedâ.
Here is a good spiel on Castroâs foreign policy, including intervention in Africa;
Yet there are numerous misconceptions on the left about Cuban foreign policy. While it is true that Fidel Castro maintained his opposition to the U.S. empire to his last breath, his Cuban foreign policy, especially after the late 1960s, was moved more by the defense of Cuban state interests as defined by him and by his alliance with the USSR than by the pursuit of anti-capitalist revolution as such. Because the Soviet Union regarded Latin America as part of the U.S. sphere of influence, it applied strong political and economic pressure on Cuba to play down its open support for guerrilla warfare in Latin America. By the late 1960s, the USSR succeeded in this effort and that is why in the 1970s Cuba turned to Africa with a vigor that came from knowing that its policies in that continent were strategically more compatible with Soviet interests, in spite of their many tactical disagreements. This strategic alliance with the USSR helps to explain why Cubaâs African policy had quite different implications for Angola and South African apartheid where it was generally on the left, than for the Horn of Africa, where it was not. In this part of the continent, Fidel Castroâs government supported a âleftistâ bloody dictatorship in Ethiopia and indirectly helped that government in its efforts to suppress Eritrean independence. The single most important factor explaining Cubaâs policy in that area was that the new Ethiopian government had taken the side of the Soviets in the Cold War. It was for the same reasons that Fidel Castro, to the great surprise and disappointment of the Cuban people, supported the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, although it was clear that Castroâs political dislike for Dubcekâs liberal policies played an important role in his decision to support the Soviet action. Fidel Castro also supported, at least implicitly, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, although he did it with much discomfort and in a low-key manner because, as it happened, Cuba had just assumed the leadership of the Non-Aligned Movement, the great majority of whose members strongly opposed the Soviet intervention.
He was a Soviet poodle just like you would like to criticise Tony Blair for following W around. It does amaze me that you would create a fairy tale above to justify his intervention and cause of thousands of deaths, directly and indirectly, abroad. I have NEVER said I am against interventionism, but you are passionate in your dislike of it it (BLIAR). Once again though, this is another principle that goes out the window when you talk about Castro.
Once again, you justify his sibling dictatorship for 60 years. You are tying yourself to privilege of family name. Now that it is clear that Sidney justifies single party, undemocratic rule in a country, we know that he also believes that only a family name can keep that faithful line. Much like your mate Jeremy Corbyn, your stance on the benign Monarchy is shown to be hypocritical. Another principle in the toilet.
Itâs great that you seem to dislike over a million people exiled from their country. Youâre a real man of the people I see.
You are very trusting in Castroâs statements and media;
A major feature of Fidel Castroâs 47-year-old rule was his manipulation of popular support. This was especially evident in the first two years of the revolution (1959-1960) during which he never revealed even to his supporters where he intended to go politically. The systematic censorship that his government established since 1960 is intrinsic to the manipulative politics of his regime, and has continued under RaĂșl Castro. The mass media, in compliance with the âorientationsâ of the Ideological Department of the Cuban Communist Party, publishes only the news that satisfy the political needs of the government. Censorship is most striking in radio and television, which is under the aegis of the ICRT (Instituto Cubano de Radio y TelevisionâCuban Institute of Radio and Television), an institution despised by many artists and intellectuals for its censorious and arbitrary practices. The systematic absence of transparency in the operations of the Cuban government has continued under RaĂșl Castroâs rule. A clear example is the sudden removal, in 2009, of two top political leaders, Foreign Minister Felipe PĂ©rez Roque and Vice President Carlos Lage, without a full explanation from the government for the decision. Since then a video detailing the governmentâs version of that event has been produced but shown only to selected audiences of leaders and cadres of the Cuban Communist Party. Censorship and the lack of transparency has at times turned into outright mendacity, like in the case of Fidel Castroâs repeated denials of physical mistreatment in Cuban prisons, in the face of its well documented existence by several independent human rights organizations.
Organisations like Amnesty International. We can add them to the list of organisations Sidney doesnât trust and this should be noted when he ever talks about them in future.[quote=âSidney, post:449, topic:23439â]
The Cuban vote splits almost 50-50 in Florida at this point.
Who has said anything about how Cuban immigrants shouldnât be treated fairly?
Your guy is the one saying that. The Cubans who donât like Castro are the âgood immigrantsâ in your eyes simply because they donât like Castro.
Again, the difference between the Cuban exiles and the Syrians is that one group is fleeing a war, the other is fleeing peace. But the ones that are fleeing war are apparently âthe bad guysâ.
[/quote]
By Fidel Castroâs own admission, he had over 20,000 POLITICAL PRISONERS in 1967.
He lined thousands up in front of firing squads.
Castro decided to bring the threat of nuclear war to his country so he could secure his own position.
Yup, the million people took flight from a peaceful existence alright.
Your delusion knows no bounds.
You will point me to the heads of state, such as our President at the time Mary McAleese, for her statement at the time of Pinochetâs death.
Colm OâGorman? This is like a t-rex trying to the front crawl at this stage, give it up.
1 Like
FFS sake Tim, do you honestly think anyone is going to read all of that?
3 Likes
I am replying to Sidney. I thought you were a beaten docket on this thread a while ago tbh. I await your eulogy for Mugabe with interest.
Tim, itâs far too verbose. Sid is the only fucker that will actually read all of that.
And guess who I was responding to?
Iâm trying to keep the discussion moving. If yourself and Sid start posting garrulous tripe like that the thread will be finished.
Great post, I really enjoyed reading it.
2 Likes