Poor Cuba - - Damian Penny
breaks down something I have been grumbling about since Carter hit Havanna and illuminates the Bush Cuba speech of today.
Those who demand engagement with Cuba because we engage nations like China are off their rockers. In fact, non-engagement actually has worked, so long as people are fully committed a la Cold War. The real question is: has engagement ever really worked.
It doesn’t matter; non-engagement doesn’t mean doom and gloom-as Penny rightly points out PJ O’Rourke’s nod to Taiwan under the non-engagement of China. Hell we engage with all sorts of places that never change-anyone, anyone? Bueller?
Well, there is France? All we have done is engage with them since the end of WWII and well; you don’t have to be Jonah Goldberg
to see that they are cheese eating appeasing monkeys does it? Click on this old G-File to see some classic “France” stuff-plus a great, surprise, O’Rourke quote: "The French are sawed-off sissies who eat snails and slugs and cheese that smells like people's feet. Utter cowards who force their own children to drink wine, they gibber like baboons even when you try to speak to them in their own wimpy language."
Seriously though, if Castro wants to continue his socialist death march to oblivion why should we give him a parting gift? I have wondered that when the entire world trades with Cuba except America and Israel why the embargo even matters. Let me get this straight: 98 percent of the world can trade with Cuba yet they need to trade with all 100 percent to succeed.
Non-engagement, to me, seems to be something akin to appeasement. We’ve tried that too and given the French preclusion to it; you can see why it is a bad, bad, idea.