232

Brazil's president calls U.S. economic embargo on Cuba 'illegal,' condemns terrorist list label (www.reuters.com)

submitted 1 year ago by alphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to c/world@lemmy.world

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] severien@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago

Well Russia is currently bombing a European country which I personally consider much worse than an embargo.

[-] febra@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Well, I'm sorry, but I don't see how two wrongs makes a right. This is some massive whataboutism. Both an embargo on Cuba and Russia bombing other countries are horrendous activities.

[-] severien@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Sure, but the comment I was replying to made a direct comparison with Russia.

[-] febra@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

First and foremost, that was my comment. Secondly, it still doesn't make it okay. It's not a real argument. If the US can pull this shit off, why can't Russia or China. I'm not excusing their actions, but just look at it from the perspective of someone from one of those countries. They see the US invading countries, putting embargos on others, and a bunch of other crap. Why shouldn't they do the same? The invasion of Iraq was just as justified as the invasion of Ukraine. Same shit based on bullshit arguments. Yet somehow one is more acceptable than the other. I'd rather not have any of them. And I'm from Eastern Europe just for context :)

[-] severien@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not justifying anything. I was just reacting to this:

Just imagine China or Russia doing the same to some random European country.

Which was a weird sentence - we don't have to imagine anything, Russia is already doing much worse.

[-] Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip -4 points 1 year ago

It's not whataboutism, you made a comment and this was a valid reply to the content of your comment in context.

-unconcerned outsider

[-] fiat_lux@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

The US this year has launched airstrikes in Syria, Somalia and possibly Yemen. That is not somehow better, just because they're not a European country. And even if it were better, another country doing really shitty things is not a good argument for why a separate country can do maybe-less-shitty-but-still-shitty things.

Cuba has been under full trade embargo by the US for over 60 years, after the US Bay of Pigs Invasion failure. Russia only has sanctions and embargoes by the US on some products though, despite invading a European country. How does that happen?

[-] GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Russian population in the USA isn't demanding we embargo Russia whereas it is Cuban-Americans leading that charge in FL.

Edit changed Cubans to Cuban-Americans as TheDankHold pointed out my error.

[-] febra@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Cuban-Americans are americans. They're not citizens of Cuba. And just because a minority wants an embargo on another country doesn't mean you should just play world police. That's not your place to decide who trades with whom. If you don't wanna do trade with them, then don't.

[-] TheDankHold@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is actually Americans leading that charge, they’ve been here long enough to qualify as Americans first and foremost imo. And that doesn’t mean anything regardless, how do the citizens that live on the island feel about the embargo?

[-] GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks I edited my comment to reflect the necessary change.

Why should Cubans determine the policy of other countries? Do I get a say in how Cuba does business?

Im not asking those flippantly. What you are suggesting makes no sense given how reality functions.

[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

relevance?

this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023

232 points (94.3% liked)

World News

38978 readers

1365 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.