"On the contrary, yes we do. That's been the norm ever since Castro came to power years ago. "
Silly. Castro isn't universally loved there or even a great guy, but he has no place in the company of the psychopaths I mentioned. (Whom Roger Waters once referred to as "an anonymous group of Latin American meat packing glitterati")
"True, but Castro didn't want to work with us on the issue of nationalization. Both sides didn't bend, and the rest is..well.."history". "
Why? Was it our country?
"The Sandinistas, the Contras, the FARC, etc followed guerrilla tactics that Che laid down 25 years later. They were just as brutal, just as shrewd and just as misguided as their Communist "allies" were 35 years ago. And it got them nowhere (except for, maybe, a former Sandinista rebel leader elected as President). "
That's also a crock. The Sandinistas, deposed Somoza, promised elections and delivered. Daniel Ortega remains active in politics, currently president, but it's a democracy. The Contras were state sponsored terrorists, us being the state that sponsored them (Reagan, North, Casey etc... Iran Contra) FARC tends to kill far fewer of it's prisoners than almost anyone in the known world. It ain't like the government of Columbia's any kind of paradigm of cleanliness.
"you see plenty of news outlets berating the country for it's numerous...numerous...numerous human rights violations (particularly in Tibet). "
True enough and rightly so, but they aren't printing vicious lies about the Chinese leadership banking billions in personal fortunes abroad now, are they... ?
And the Tibet thing tends to annoy me too. Why wax poetic about freeing Tibet when there are so many countries over which we do hold sway, that we could be encouraging to do the right thing?
And while we're at it, let's not look to closely at what "human rights" looked like in Tibet without the Chinese, eh?
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
