[GuillermoX]

I understand that both countries are despicable. But to suggest that we shouldn't have an embargo against China but one against Cuba because "China is better" is absolutely absurd.

I'm against embargoes, period. But if you're for an embargo against Cuba but not for one against China, you're a hypocrite.

[Dqban22]

The truth of the mater is, as Senator Jesse Helms stated: "Unfortunately, some in Washington are all too willing to give Castro what he wants. At the least they should stop pretending that they are doing this to promote Cuban democracy and American values.”

Don’t try to fool the American people. What economic sense makes to sell to a bankrupt person with a long history of defaulting in his debts? That can only happen when the creditor deals with money that is not his own, as in the case of politicians dealing with taxpayers' money.

Those foreign investors caught in Castro’s scam want that the U.S. and the American taxpayers assume the Soviet Union’s role of maintaining Castro’s regime to the tune of 6 billion dollars annually, hoping that they would be able to recoup some of their ill advised investments. The Cuban people repudiate all those investors and tourists that have exploited them in partnership with the Cuban tyrant.

To lift the embargo means to prop up Castro’s rule of terror. Do not contribute to prolonging the suffering of the Cuban people. Castro is the only one responsible for Cuba’s tragedy, and the embargo, although incomplete and imperfect, is the only ray of hope for the Cuban people to see freedom restored in Cuba.

Two wrongs do not make one right. It is completely hypocritical on your part to affirm that both cases should be treated equally and since there is not an embargo against China we should reward Castro with 6 billion dollars of American taxpayers' money every year.