Log in

View Full Version : another way to become an almost billionare...



theraven
5th May 2006, 23:54
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060504/ts_nm/forbes_rulers_dc_1


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Cuban President
Fidel Castro was furious when Forbes magazine estimated his fortune at $550 million last year. This year, the magazine upped its estimate of the communist leader's wealth to a cool $900 million.

it says he denies it, but c'mon...

Capitalist Lawyer
6th May 2006, 00:01
Ohhh, he's just being humble.... :wub:

How adorable...socialist dictators have feelings too you know!

Isn't it about time we shoot this clown in the head and stuff him full of macaroni and cheese?

redstar2000
6th May 2006, 00:14
Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 5 2006, 06:22 PM
Isn't it about time we shoot this clown in the head and stuff him full of macaroni and cheese?
The CIA tried...and failed.

Repeatedly.

Like your chances? :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

More Fire for the People
6th May 2006, 00:25
The question is, how does one go about acquiring $900 million in Cuba? And if he was a rich dictator, why would his only luxury be a wide screen TV?

theraven
6th May 2006, 00:30
The CIA tried...and failed.

Repeatedly.

Like your chances?

thats becuse they hired the mob lmao


The question is, how does one go about acquiring $900 million in Cuba? And if he was a rich dictator, why would his only luxury be a wide screen TV?

lol perhaps he likes to keep his money in a bank ;)

as for quairing 900 million dollars- you won companies and take a lot of profits.

Oh-Dae-Su
6th May 2006, 03:38
The CIA tried...and failed.

Repeatedly.

Like your chances

:rolleyes: your so funny, i know deep inside you know if they really wanted to , they can have Castro stuffed in a duffle bag heading to the bottom of the Caribbean....but what's Cuba? an island without any real resources, just imgine if Cuba had oil, hahaha Castro wouldnt of even been allowed to have been born :lol: in the 1960 Bay of Pigs, was poorly trained Cuban dissidents....bring in just 1 American Marine infantry battalion or something, and they would have been in Havana in 2 hours...

LSD
6th May 2006, 04:52
Yes, Oh-Dae-Su, the US military is "invincible"... :rolleyes:

I think you might want to have a few words with the Viet Cong! :lol:

Oh-Dae-Su
6th May 2006, 06:07
Yes, Oh-Dae-Su, the US military is "invincible"...

I think you might want to have a few words with the Viet Cong!

humm, for some reason i think Viet Cong are from Vietnam and not from Cuba? maybe im mistaken :rolleyes: Vietnam is nothing like Cuba buddy, Cuba doesn't have those dense jungles, and the Cubans would not have been as fanatical...

another thing, get it through your head, we left Vietnam because of public sentiment, because of hippies probably like yourself, who skipped college class to protest the war with "PEACE DUDE" signs....the reality is that the US could have stayed in Vietnam and practically win, we were loosing 1 american for 20 Vietnamese, do the math...plus we weren't just fighting in Vietnam, maybe thats a misconseption you and many others have, read up on Laos and Cambodia....the Viet Cong couldn't stand 10 seconds face to face with the Americans, they just hid in the jungles, waiting for us to drop napalm on their asses...pretty much is like Iraq now, we controlled the country, the cities etc.. but these people are like ants, how are you suppose to tell them appart!!? it's impossible, so we do raids, and we kill like 20 of these bastards, they do a roadside bomb or ambush and they kill 1 american, than it gets to the press and the media, and they portray it as a sign that we are loosing the war? than you and others buy that bullcrap :rolleyes:

Oh-Dae-Su
6th May 2006, 06:11
by the way, yes LSD, we are invincible, i mean, i can't think of any army in the world that can beat us, we have the best military technology, the best equipment, and the best trained soldiers in the world......of course if Britain , France, Russia, China etc.. were to gang up on us eventually they would probably prevail, it just like WW2...trust me if Hitler had not made the stupidest mistake of picking a fight with the USSR, and having a battle in the eastern front, the Allies would not have gotten 1 inch into the beaches of Normandy.... Hitler was a dumb ass invading USSR, after Stalingrad the German forces took a heavy toll...

LSD
6th May 2006, 06:23
another thing, get it through your head, we left Vietnam because of public sentiment

And you don't think that "public sentiment" would be negatively affected by a long occupation in Cuba?

What was Bush's latest approval rating again? :lol:

No one doubts that the US has more "blowing up" power than any other organization on earth. But mere firepower is not sufficient. The point is that the US, as a decadent imperial state, is unwilling to deal with the continuous personel losses and resource drain that accompanies a protracted war of attrition.


by the way, yes LSD, we are invincible

So was Rome.

Oh-Dae-Su
6th May 2006, 06:37
And you don't think that "public sentiment" would be negatively affected by a long occupation in Cuba?

who said anything about occupation of Cuba? we were talking about taking Castro out of power, and yes probably after that our presence would be strong in Cuba, but it would be for rebuilding, and after a while our presence will lower, but it will end up like South Korea or something, and shit Cuba with the status of South Korea is a Cuba waaaaaaaaaay better than the one right now....



The point is that the US, as a decadent imperial state, is unwilling to deal with the continuous personel losses and resource drain that accompanies a protracted war of attrition.

huh? :blink: WTF? protracted war of attrition? what the hell? lmao dude speak english

so we are unwilling to deal with the losses in american personel and resources from our long war of reduction? lmao i totally do not understand this at all man


So was Rome.

sure LSD, the sun will stop shining one day as well, but for now, we are invincible...maybe in the year 3045 the US will be a pile of rubble, but trust me so will the rest of the world...and thankfully i will not be there to see it :D so yes we are not invincible :rolleyes:

Vladislav
6th May 2006, 08:20
Yes... the U.S forces are doing so well in Iraq.

overlord
6th May 2006, 11:17
Yes... the U.S forces are doing so well in Iraq.

HAH! The objective of US forces in Iraq is simply to give Al Quida a playpen for U.S. to carpet bomb to they don't touch the U.S.

Objective number 2 is to provide a steady and consistent direction to drive up the gold and oil prices so people with long term futures contracts can become billionaires. They've done a good job havn't they?

Objective number 3 is to make money for American companies at the expense of the U.S. taxpaying idiots.

Lord Testicles
6th May 2006, 11:27
lmao i totally do not understand this at all man

Thats because you are an idiot.


maybe in the year 3045 the US will be a pile of rubble, but trust me so will the rest of the world...and thankfully i will not be there to see it

It wont take that much time look at the british.


trust me if Hitler had not made the stupidest mistake of picking a fight with the USSR, and having a battle in the eastern front, the Allies would not have gotten 1 inch into the beaches of Normandy.... Hitler was a dumb ass invading USSR, after Stalingrad the German forces took a heavy toll...

That would be a good thing would it? I think we should be thankful that the USSR got involved in WW2, but that just sounds like you want hitler to win.

TC
6th May 2006, 11:43
they don't actually "estimate his wealth" they just give a bogus figure based on a percentage of the cuban economy it has utterly nothing to do with his assets in reality.

Invader Zim
6th May 2006, 12:36
Originally posted by Oh-Dae-[email protected] 6 2006, 06:32 AM
by the way, yes LSD, we are invincible, i mean, i can't think of any army in the world that can beat us, we have the best military technology, the best equipment, and the best trained soldiers in the world......of course if Britain , France, Russia, China etc.. were to gang up on us eventually they would probably prevail, it just like WW2...trust me if Hitler had not made the stupidest mistake of picking a fight with the USSR, and having a battle in the eastern front, the Allies would not have gotten 1 inch into the beaches of Normandy.... Hitler was a dumb ass invading USSR, after Stalingrad the German forces took a heavy toll...
The US is not invicible, sinse the dawn of nuclear weapons, all the most developed nations have been cut down to military equality.

Hegemonicretribution
6th May 2006, 13:43
Oh-Dae-Su, almost every country sees their own millitary as superior (at least the millitary itself does), and within that every division is made to think it is the best. It is an obvious trick, and it keeps moral high, and self-importance higher.

If you went to a British army base for example you would hear some respect for US equiptment, but not all, and virtually none of the soldiers. Depending on where you go British troops are expected to win a fire fight when outnumbered between 3 and 10-1, this is against Americans also. Tactics are also an important element, Americans often use "spraying" which is something not as widely used by British troops. British troops also lose far few of their numbers to friendly fire, and better use the resources they do have. The SA80 may be a pile of shit, and the LSW isn't great either, but the GPMG is a fine weapon.

I have also spent time with Canadians who thought their millitary was the best, and this trend is quite common.

If the USA was said to have a better army than other countries then it would be based only upon the fact that they are larger, and spend more money on their troop's equiptment than other nations, although training is often cheaper.

Vladislav
6th May 2006, 14:10
we have the best military technology, the best equipment, and the best trained soldiers in the world

Best trained? I doubt that. Best military technology and best equipment.Yes.
But there are some things that the U.S soldiers don't have. Bravery and a normal I.Q level.

violencia.Proletariat
6th May 2006, 14:31
we have the best military technology

The iron triangles in the politics of military budget make this a laughable statement. Remember Spinney?


the best equipment

Maybe? You just don't give it to the troops (body armor), and then you won't let them buy it with their own cash. What kind of capitalists are you? :lol:


the best trained soldiers in the world

This means nothing when you are invading a country that the native people REALLY don't want you in.

Sabocat
6th May 2006, 14:37
Tisk, tisk. Look at all the nationalistic dick measuring.

:lol:

Martin Blank
6th May 2006, 14:48
Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 08:58 AM
Tisk, tisk. Look at all the nationalistic dick measuring.

:lol:
Are you surprised? You've heard George Carlin's theory about this, right?


I also look at war itself a little differently from most. I see it largely as an exercise in dick-waving. That's really all it is: a lot of men standing around in a field waving their dicks at one another. Men, insecure about the size of their penises, choose to kill one another.

That's also what all that moron athlete bullshit is all about, and what that macho, male posturing and strutting around in bars and locker rooms represents. It's called 'dick fear.' Men are terrified that their dicks are inadequate, and so they have to 'compete' in order to feel better about themselves. And since war is the ultimate competition, essentially men are killing one another in order to improve their genital self-esteem.

You needn't be a historian or a political scientist to see the Bigger Dick Foreign Policy Theory at work. It goes like this: 'What? They have bigger dicks? Bomb them!' And of course, the bombs, the rockets, and the bullets are all shaped like penises. Phallic weapons. There's an unconscious need to project the national penis into the affairs of others. It's called 'fucking with people'

So as far as I'm concerned, that whole thing in the Persian Gulf was nothing more than one big dick-waving cockfight.

In this particular case, Saddam Hussein questioned the size of George Bush's dick. And George Bush had been called a wimp for so long, he apparently felt the need to act out his manhood fantasies by sending America's white children to kill other people's brown children.

Miles

TC
7th May 2006, 00:28
....the Viet Cong couldn't stand 10 seconds face to face with the Americans, they just hid in the jungles, waiting for us to drop napalm on their asses

Modern wars are not faught "face to face" like 18th century musketeers, both sides use cover, the Americans and Vietnamese Communists both faught in the jungles and the cities and both hid when they could.


The US might be technologically superior in a couple of areas but its grunts on the ground are no better than anyone elses, in fact they're frequently less well diciplined and less experianced than their enemies.

And btw, the People's Republic of China with Soviet air support defeated the Americans in north Korea in a conventional, non-guerilla war, so you can hardly claim that the US is "invincible" even in symmetrical warfare.

theraven
7th May 2006, 02:22
Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 11:49 PM

....the Viet Cong couldn't stand 10 seconds face to face with the Americans, they just hid in the jungles, waiting for us to drop napalm on their asses

Modern wars are not faught "face to face" like 18th century musketeers, both sides use cover, the Americans and Vietnamese Communists both faught in the jungles and the cities and both hid when they could.


The US might be technologically superior in a couple of areas but its grunts on the ground are no better than anyone elses, in fact they're frequently less well diciplined and less experianced than their enemies.

And btw, the People's Republic of China with Soviet air support defeated the Americans in north Korea in a conventional, non-guerilla war, so you can hardly claim that the US is "invincible" even in symmetrical warfare.
they pushed the americans to a stalemate. we managed to hold them from taking south korea, while they kept us form north korea. moral at home kept us from going all the way nesscary to take north korea.

Oh-Dae-Su
7th May 2006, 07:50
alright, now lets get down to business, by the way overlord, that avatar is by far the funniest shit iv ever seen, in fact dude seriously you should make that into a shirt and distribute it hahahahah ohh man that would be awsome....

ok, now to address these moronic turds, starting with the biggest one , Skinz (which by the way that kind of sounds like a neo-Nazi name)


Thats because you are an idiot.

alrighty Sherlock thanks for your insightful comment, yet i want you to tell me what the hell does this mean!! anyone please!!

The point is that the US, as a decadent imperial state, is unwilling to deal with the continuous personel losses and resource drain that accompanies a protracted war of attrition.

WTF? :blink: lol, i just can't wait what will Skinz defenition of this cryptic and dubious comment is... :rolleyes:


It wont take that much time look at the british.
:blink: sooooo.....according to you the brits are :"a pile of rubble", oook ill leave it at that (where the hell have you been?)


That would be a good thing would it? I think we should be thankful that the USSR got involved in WW2, but that just sounds like you want hitler to win.
does your brain lack the sufficient cells to function properly in order to infer that i was merely comparing Hitler's army to America in the sense that it was invincible, and that for it to crumble it took a couple of nations to gang up on it? just like i said that if a couple of nations would gang up on America, it probably will suffer the same fate, but until than 1 to 1 it is invincible...of course im thankful for the USSR and why would it sound that i wanted Hitler to win? im merely acknowledging facts and giving credit where it is due, does that make me a Nazi now? wtf, if i acknowledged the fact that German scientists during the war were the best would that make me a supporter as well?? :rolleyes: dude seriously check if your brain is getting enough oxygen...

anyways, moving on, to :


almost every country sees their own millitary as superior

ok, lets cut the crap, sure every country believes they make the best watches and the best cars and everything else right? :rolleyes: why is it so hard for you guys to just accept the truth? seriously!! tell me what nation in the world can beat us 1 to 1? give me a break guys c'mon cut the crap seriously, it's one thing to hate us, but it's another just to make this horrendous excuses in order to evade the truth..which by the way are pretty laughable



If the USA was said to have a better army than other countries then it would be based only upon the fact that they are larger, and spend more money on their troop's equiptment than other nations, although training is often cheaper.

only upon the fact that they are LARGER? ok, now thats it, go home, larger in what? people taller than others? hahaha or larger in personel? dude China DUHHH!!! has the largest personel army, and only now are we second, because of Iraq and Afghanistan......and training is often cheaper? ok , seriously tell me what country has the best trained soldiers? im dying to hear this one!!! BRITAIN? is that your anwser, lmao who do the brits have? SAS? ever heard of Navy Seals? yet again, guys seriously stop making fools of yourselves, give credit where it is due god dammit, it's like me saying " NAH BRAZIL SUCKS AT SOCCER", when they are the reigning champions and 5 times winners...


But there are some things that the U.S soldiers don't have. Bravery and a normal I.Q level. :lol: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!! hey at least your a funny guy hhahahahhahahahahahaha

we dont have bravery and a normal IQ level, yeah we are not brave, we are RAMBO BRAVE, and we don't have a NORMAL IQ lever, we have an EXTRAORDINARY IQ level ...hahahahahahah :rolleyes:


The iron triangles in the politics of military budget make this a laughable statement. Remember Spinney?

yeah man, it's so laughable that the US spends 6 times more money on military technology than the next that follows on the list :
in 2003 the United States spent approximately 47% of the world's total military spending of US$956,000,000,000.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budg...e_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States)



Maybe? You just don't give it to the troops (body armor), and then you won't let them buy it with their own cash. What kind of capitalists are you

alright man, realistically, what army has body armor? at least they asked for it, what other army can even believe in asking for them?


The US might be technologically superior in a couple of areas but its grunts on the ground are no better than anyone elses, in fact they're frequently less well diciplined and less experianced than their enemies.

And btw, the People's Republic of China with Soviet air support defeated the Americans in north Korea in a conventional, non-guerilla war, so you can hardly claim that the US is "invincible" even in symmetrical warfare.

maybe it's because i watch History Channel and Military Channel too much, but you obviously haven't seen programs iv seen....but even anyone with half a brain, how can they say that US soldiers are frequently less well disciplined and less expirienced than those enemies in say Afghanistan and Iraq? those ground battles are fought by American soldiers with a tactic called, "fire supperiority", that is we fire more bullets at you than you at us, and frankly you can't compete with that...i see a program called Shoot Out, which dramatizes instances in which groups of Americans fight out ground wars, and in all of them they are outnumbered, but those insurgent bastards always retreat!! HAH!!! can't beat us baby

and yes btw, about the AIR SUPPORT, iv seen another program called, Dog Fight, in which of course like 1 American plane against like 10 soviets, and no kills from the soviets, while the American gets an Ace.. hahaha

hey at least i got my back up from actual historical accounts from TV programs, where are yours?

bcbm
7th May 2006, 09:44
which dramatizes instances in which groups of Americans fight out ground wars, and in all of them they are outnumbered, but those insurgent bastards always retreat!!

Always? As I recall from watching some show or other on the History channel, a group of outnumbered Americans were lucky to get out alive in Somolia.

Vladislav
7th May 2006, 10:38
and yes btw, about the AIR SUPPORT, iv seen another program called, Dog Fight, in which of course like 1 American plane against like 10 soviets, and no kills from the soviets, while the American gets an Ace.. hahaha

What? Like a movie? Sure they'd show how America was the 'greatest' and that they were top shit and all. But c'mon who are they really fooling?...oh, sorry Oh-Dae-Su.
I also heard from a documentary that the Americans wanted to nuke Seoul because they were losing and running out of ways to take it back. Remember Hiroshima? Is that all the Americans can come up with? If you can't win then nuke the shit outta it?
And btw with modern technology it'll take 1 nuke from North Korea or Iran to blow the shit out of your 'Utopian' country and turn it into rubble.




hey at least i got my back up from actual historical accounts from TV programs, where are yours?

How can we believe you?Half of those documentaries are from a Western point of view,which show America as a the 'good guys' and others as the 'bad guys'.You also claim to be of Cuban descent...where's your proof of that?

theraven
7th May 2006, 17:47
Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 7 2006, 09:05 AM

which dramatizes instances in which groups of Americans fight out ground wars, and in all of them they are outnumbered, but those insurgent bastards always retreat!!

Always? As I recall from watching some show or other on the History channel, a group of outnumbered Americans were lucky to get out alive in Somolia.
i believe they were about 100 vs a mob of over 10,000. I believe the us suffered 30ish causlties and the estaitmed death toll on other side is estaimted conservtiviely at 1000. there is a ceritan point when numbers



What? Like a movie? Sure they'd show how America was the 'greatest' and that they were top shit and all. But c'mon who are they really fooling?...oh, sorry Oh-Dae-Su.
I also heard from a documentary that the Americans wanted to nuke Seoul because they were losing and running out of ways to take it back. Remember Hiroshima? Is that all the Americans can come up with? If you can't win then nuke the shit outta it?
And btw with modern technology it'll take 1 nuke from North Korea or Iran to blow the shit out of your 'Utopian' country and turn it into rubble.

No, what Macaruthr (the general at the time) wanted to do was bomb hcina, including nuking several maor cities. his theory was if we knocekd em out we could retake korea AND kick the chicoms out of china. Truman vetoed it.

Oh-Dae-Su
7th May 2006, 18:20
What? Like a movie? Sure they'd show how America was the 'greatest' and that they were top shit and all. But c'mon who are they really fooling?...oh, sorry Oh-Dae-Su.
I also heard from a documentary that the Americans wanted to nuke Seoul because they were losing and running out of ways to take it back. Remember Hiroshima? Is that all the Americans can come up with? If you can't win then nuke the shit outta it?
And btw with modern technology it'll take 1 nuke from North Korea or Iran to blow the shit out of your 'Utopian' country and turn it into rubble

what like a movie? :blink: umm it's called a documentary, it's not a hollywood movie numnuts....and who are we fooling? nobody!
remember Hiroshima? not really because i was not even dreamed of being alive, but yes i do know we dropped an atomic bomb, but it wasn't because the USA was "ohh my god desperate", it was because we did not want to have to go through the ordeal of having to invade freaking Japan loosing more of our soldiers and killing more japanese and japanese civilians, so the obvious anwser to a quick ending of a war was the atomic bomb, we expected for it to shock and scare the shit out of the Japs, which it did, but they did not surrender and 8 days later we droped the other bomb, and this time the Japs had no option but to surrender, they were really scared now....so what would you have suggested? that we kept on fighting? more people would have died if we had invaded Japan, and frankly we would have taken Japan but it would of taken more years...is that what you wanted to see? a longer and bloddier war? :rolleyes:


How can we believe you?Half of those documentaries are from a Western point of view,which show America as a the 'good guys' and others as the 'bad guys'.You also claim to be of Cuban descent...where's your proof of that?

well sure you don't have to believe me at all, and of course we are going to think we are the good guys, i think that rightfully so, why wouldn't i? who would i think are the good guys? North Korea? :rolleyes: Iran? :lol: Palestine? :ph34r: give me a break here dude, get real...America is the good guy, if not i want you to tell me who are the good guys, ohh boy i really wanna hear this one :lol: and no i don't CLAIM to be of Cuban descent, i AM Cuban, born there, lived there for the first 9 years of my life, and you ask me for proof! well what do you want me to do? fax you a copy of my passport? get out of here you wacko! hahahaha if you don't believe me, ENTONCES CALLATE LA BOCA Y NO ME JODAS MAS!

bezdomni
7th May 2006, 18:38
We might as well be arguing over who what superheros would win in a fight. This thread is ridiculous.

The fact is, the United States Army is not invincible. Only a naive FoxNews fan would beg to differ. Nobody will dispute that it gets the best funding in the world, but I can guarantee you that it is incredibly falliable. I have a friend in Iraq right now and it is a fucking hellhole. You should hear the things he has to say, they're awful.

Furthermore, Forbes Magazine has an obvious anti-socialist agenda. For chrissake, their motto is "Perpetuating Capitalism Since 19??" or something. Nobody at Forbes magazine knows how much money Castro has. They probably calculate a percentage of the Cuban GDP and attribute it to Castro.


ENTONCES CALLATE LA BOCA Y NO ME JODAS MAS!
Ew. <_<

redstar2000
7th May 2006, 18:40
Originally posted by Oh&#045;Dae&#045;Su
Hey at least I got my back up from actual historical accounts from TV programs.

For our readers in other countries: one of the unique characteristics of patriotic Americans is that if they see it on the dummyvision, they believe it&#39;s true. :lol:

Hard to believe, I know. :blink:

Note further that poor Oh-Dae-Su comes from a gusano family...who probably think Castro practices cannibalism. The gusano view of the world is so totally wacko that one would have to visit one their sites to believe it...no verbal description could do it justice.

In fact, you could make it into an excellent fantasy role-playing game.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

theraven
7th May 2006, 20:10
Originally posted by redstar2000+May 7 2006, 06:01 PM--> (redstar2000 @ May 7 2006, 06:01 PM)
Oh&#045;Dae&#045;Su
Hey at least I got my back up from actual historical accounts from TV programs.

For our readers in other countries: one of the unique characteristics of patriotic Americans is that if they see it on the dummyvision, they believe it&#39;s true. :lol:

Hard to believe, I know. :blink:

Note further that poor Oh-Dae-Su comes from a gusano family...who probably think Castro practices cannibalism. The gusano view of the world is so totally wacko that one would have to visit one their sites to believe it...no verbal description could do it justice.

In fact, you could make it into an excellent fantasy role-playing game.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif [/b]
whats a gusano?

theraven
7th May 2006, 20:12
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 05:59 PM
We might as well be arguing over who what superheros would win in a fight. This thread is ridiculous.

The fact is, the United States Army is not invincible. Only a naive FoxNews fan would beg to differ. Nobody will dispute that it gets the best funding in the world, but I can guarantee you that it is incredibly falliable. I have a friend in Iraq right now and it is a fucking hellhole. You should hear the things he has to say, they&#39;re awful.

Furthermore, Forbes Magazine has an obvious anti-socialist agenda. For chrissake, their motto is "Perpetuating Capitalism Since 19??" or something. Nobody at Forbes magazine knows how much money Castro has. They probably calculate a percentage of the Cuban GDP and attribute it to Castro.


ENTONCES CALLATE LA BOCA Y NO ME JODAS MAS&#33;
Ew. <_<
as pointed out in the article it was determined by his control over several cuban compaies

Oh-Dae-Su
7th May 2006, 20:13
For our readers in other countries: one of the unique characteristics of patriotic Americans is that if they see it on the dummyvision, they believe it&#39;s true

right, so i should believe you and leftist websites more than History and Military Channel... :lol: :rolleyes: good one



Note further that poor Oh-Dae-Su comes from a gusano family...who probably think Castro practices cannibalism. The gusano view of the world is so totally wacko that one would have to visit one their sites to believe it...no verbal description could do it justice.

even though that&#39;s pretty insulting to me, i don&#39;t take it to the heart because i know most Cubans in Cuba feel the same way as i do, we all want a change of government, but gusano is an insulting word to me, it means worm, but at least i wouldn&#39;t give more privileges to foreigners than to my own people, thats a real gusano, Fidel is a real worm, how can anyone in ther right mind give more rights to foreign tourists than to their own people, and quite frankly redstar you sicken me, because that is obviously what you stand for and what you believe, so yeah keep calling me and others who believe in freedom and democracy gusanos, good always prevails just like in a role playing game ;)

Oh-Dae-Su
7th May 2006, 20:16
whats a gusano?

that&#39;s what Castro ass lickers call the opposition and Americans, it literally means "WORMS", so yeah they call us the worms, but like i said, at least even a worm would not give more priviliges to another species than it&#39;s own ;)

overlord
8th May 2006, 09:07
by the way overlord, that avatar is by far the funniest shit iv ever seen, in fact dude seriously you should make that into a shirt and distribute it hahahahah ohh man that would be awsome....


:lol: HAHAH, thanks man. They called me mickey mouse for saying China was communist so I thought everyone might like to see an original photograph of Che before the Stalinist thought police erased his ears.

Vladislav
8th May 2006, 09:54
Small things amuse small minds...

Oh-Dae-Su
9th May 2006, 00:04
UUUUUUU WATCH IT NOW&#33; HAHAHAHAH I GUESS THAT MEANS BIG THINGS AMAZE BIG MINDS? :blink: I GUESS THATS SUPPOSED TO MEAN YOUR MORE INTELLIGENT? HAHAA :lol:

RevMARKSman
9th May 2006, 00:56
I don&#39;t think CAPS LOCK really amuses anyone... <_<

redstar2000
9th May 2006, 01:00
Originally posted by Oh&#045;Dae&#045;Su the Proud Gusano
...and quite frankly redstar you sicken me...

Good. That&#39;s my main job here...to piss off reactionaries. :lol:

Nice to get some feedback & learn that I&#39;m doing well. :D

You are not, by the way, exactly an inspiring example of the human species yourself.

But then, I guess you know that. :lol:

Tell the truth, for once. Don&#39;t you and your family really miss Batista?

That&#39;s the picture you need for your avatar. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

Oh-Dae-Su
9th May 2006, 01:31
so, now is when you respond? after your cowardly deed is done? hahahaha


You are not, by the way, exactly an inspiring example of the human species yourself.

why is that? because i dont share your radical misleading views of the world? like that off "gusanos"? because we oppose something and someone who is obviously a bad leader? i guess because you don&#39;t support Bush that would make you a worm too huh? and your whole family as well? how about you first learn about the real things that go on on Cuba like that of tourists being priviliged over the own Cuban citizens like i told you, and then come back here with a real argument looser



Tell the truth, for once. Don&#39;t you and your family really miss Batista?

why are you asking me if you say it&#39;s the truth? :lol:

and the truth is umm NO, my parents were babies when Batista was in power, they were not like your 40 year old parents during that time, or i guess if they were babies, they were leftover mutated babies from Hitler&#39;s scientist experiments with enlarged brains who could comprehend the politics around the world during the time...


That&#39;s the picture you need for your avatar.

why don&#39;t you just go ahead and put it yourself, you already changed my Memeber Title, so? i wouldn&#39;t be surprise what you do next ;)

Oh-Dae-Su
9th May 2006, 01:41
I don&#39;t think CAPS LOCK really amuses anyone...

well than, i guess that obviously means you qualify under this category according to Vlad(the impaler)islav:


Small things amuse small minds... ;)

overlord
9th May 2006, 07:32
Redstar:

Good. That&#39;s my main job here...to piss off reactionaries.


Just remember the more pissed off we get the more money the CIA gets to take out the trash. ;)

Vladislav
9th May 2006, 08:17
Originally posted by Oh&#045;Dae&#045;[email protected] 9 2006, 01:02 AM

I don&#39;t think CAPS LOCK really amuses anyone...

well than, i guess that obviously means you qualify under this category according to Vlad(the impaler)islav:


Small things amuse small minds... ;)
I don&#39;t think she meant it that way Oh-Dae-Su.
So...
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/4826/lol8cn1.jpg

encephalon
9th May 2006, 08:30
why don&#39;t you just go ahead and put it yourself, you already changed my Memeber Title, so? i wouldn&#39;t be surprise what you do next

Actually, I&#39;ve started a vote in the People&#39;s Congress of RevolutionaryLeft.com to change your avatar, since it violates the pirate clause. Normally, the appropriate action would be to restrict you to OI, but since you&#39;re already here it seems that we indeed will have to change your avatar--banning seems a bit extreme.

In any case, the vote will end at 16:32 on May 13, 2006. If you would rather not have your avatar changed to that of batista, please use the appropriate form in time for the appropriate beaurocracy to process it.. which may already be too late.

theraven
9th May 2006, 19:09
Originally posted by Oh&#045;Dae&#045;[email protected] 7 2006, 07:37 PM

whats a gusano?

that&#39;s what Castro ass lickers call the opposition and Americans, it literally means "WORMS", so yeah they call us the worms, but like i said, at least even a worm would not give more priviliges to another species than it&#39;s own ;)
ah, i figured it was a bad...

and for the record you change your avatar to that of bastia afterall a capitilist dictator is better the a communist one no? :-p

Lord Testicles
9th May 2006, 19:16
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 07:30 PM
and for the record you change your avatar to that of bastia afterall a capitilist dictator is better the a communist one no? :-p
Firstly "communist dictator" is an oxymoron.

And secondly anyone who thinks that any dictator is "better" than another one has just shown their intelligence.

What a fucking moron. :)

theraven
10th May 2006, 05:52
Originally posted by Skinz+May 9 2006, 06:37 PM--> (Skinz @ May 9 2006, 06:37 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 07:30 PM
and for the record you change your avatar to that of bastia afterall a capitilist dictator is better the a communist one no? :-p
Firstly "communist dictator" is an oxymoron.

And secondly anyone who thinks that any dictator is "better" than another one has just shown their intelligence.

What a fucking moron. :) [/b]
a "communist dictator"is one who professes communsit ideals.

of course some dictaotrs are better then others. some ruin thier coutnires, ruin thier countires economy and have massaceres. others build up tiher countires econmies, and run the govenrmetn well. how is there not a difference?

overlord
10th May 2006, 05:53
And secondly anyone who thinks that any dictator is "better" than another one has just shown their intelligence.


Capitalist dictators are authoritarian. Communist dictators are TOTALITARIAN. I&#39;ll take the capitalist one thanks. at least I won&#39;t have to hang three of his pictures in my house.

cenv
10th May 2006, 06:01
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 05:14 AM

And secondly anyone who thinks that any dictator is "better" than another one has just shown their intelligence.


Capitalist dictators are authoritarian. Communist dictators are TOTALITARIAN. I&#39;ll take the capitalist one thanks. at least I won&#39;t have to hang three of his pictures in my house.
You are obviously still unable to grasp the fundamentals of communism, so I suggest you cut out the "communist dictator" stuff. Remember, communism is a stateless society, and socialism is the dictatorship of the proletariat, which means the proletariat is in control of society. If you want to understand communism at all, I suggest you stop closely associating communism with North Korea, Stalin, etc.

Really, the above argument was just plain pathetic.

theraven
10th May 2006, 06:16
Originally posted by Ch4r+May 10 2006, 05:22 AM--> (Ch4r @ May 10 2006, 05:22 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 05:14 AM

And secondly anyone who thinks that any dictator is "better" than another one has just shown their intelligence.


Capitalist dictators are authoritarian. Communist dictators are TOTALITARIAN. I&#39;ll take the capitalist one thanks. at least I won&#39;t have to hang three of his pictures in my house.
You are obviously still unable to grasp the fundamentals of communism, so I suggest you cut out the "communist dictator" stuff. Remember, communism is a stateless society, and socialism is the dictatorship of the proletariat, which means the proletariat is in control of society. If you want to understand communism at all, I suggest you stop closely associating communism with North Korea, Stalin, etc.

Really, the above argument was just plain pathetic. [/b]
yes, but as i expalined the ideal communist society si liek that, however there are dictaors who becaue of their idoelgoy are called communist.

Loknar
10th May 2006, 06:45
I am surprised Castro could accumulate that much. My guess is he gets it from the drug trade.

btw all of you, dictators are never good. COmmunism in it self just seems to give rise to them for some reason.

Lord Testicles
10th May 2006, 11:55
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 06:37 AM
however there are dictaors who becaue of their idoelgoy are called communist.
Oh you mean those dictators, the dictators who believe in a stateless, classless society? how could i forget those dictators? :rolleyes:

theraven
10th May 2006, 14:37
Originally posted by Skinz+May 10 2006, 11:16 AM--> (Skinz @ May 10 2006, 11:16 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 06:37 AM
however there are dictaors who becaue of their idoelgoy are called communist.
Oh you mean those dictators, the dictators who believe in a stateless, classless society? how could i forget those dictators? :rolleyes: [/b]
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.

Lord Testicles
10th May 2006, 14:56
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 02:58 PM
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.
But the point is they are not communist, so they shouldn’t be identified as such.

theraven
10th May 2006, 15:30
Originally posted by Skinz+May 10 2006, 02:17 PM--> (Skinz @ May 10 2006, 02:17 PM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 02:58 PM
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.
But the point is they are not communist, so they shouldn’t be identified as such. [/b]
they would argue they ARE communist, they don&#39;t fit YOUR defintion, but they do fit their own. and since there is no "offical" communism thus you can&#39;t sa "oh hes not a communiist" because you are not the fianl autory on such.

Lord Testicles
10th May 2006, 15:43
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 03:51 PM
they would argue they ARE communist, they don&#39;t fit YOUR defintion, but they do fit their own. and since there is no "offical" communism thus you can&#39;t sa "oh hes not a communiist" because you are not the fianl autory on such.
The only reason they would argue that they are communist is so that they could get into power.

Also all you have to do is read some communist literature and compare the dictator in question to the guidelines and you would immediately see that they are not communist.

Communism = Classless
Dictator = Class

Communism=/=Dictator

theraven
10th May 2006, 16:16
Originally posted by Skinz+May 10 2006, 03:04 PM--> (Skinz @ May 10 2006, 03:04 PM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 03:51 PM
they would argue they ARE communist, they don&#39;t fit YOUR defintion, but they do fit their own. and since there is no "offical" communism thus you can&#39;t sa "oh hes not a communiist" because you are not the fianl autory on such.
The only reason they would argue that they are communist is so that they could get into power.

Also all you have to do is read some communist literature and compare the dictator in question to the guidelines and you would immediately see that they are not communist.

Communism = Classless
Dictator = Class

Communism=/=Dictator [/b]
exactly, all dictaots use an idleogy to get into power. we use those idologies to identify them. you can argue till your blue in the face that they dont&#39; fit the defintion, but it doesnt matter.

cenv
11th May 2006, 01:14
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.
Of course it matters. The people who spend time complaining about "communist dictators" seem to think that these dictators and totalitarian states are models of what communists want and are in some way communist more than in name, which causes their definition of communism to become twisted. The result of that is that they are unable to disconnect these "communist dictatorships" from true communism, hence rejecting any ideology that uses the label "communism", even if the goal of that ideology is the establishment of a stateless, classless society, which is on the opposite of the spectrum from, say, North Korea.


they would argue they ARE communist, they don&#39;t fit YOUR defintion, but they do fit their own. and since there is no "offical" communism thus you can&#39;t sa "oh hes not a communiist" because you are not the fianl autory on such.
True, we are not the final authority on what communism is or isn&#39;t and who does or does not subscribe to it. That honor goes to Karl Marx, and he would tell you that your dictatorships are not communist, or even socialist, societies. There are plenty of well-written articles here on RevLeft that can describe to you what communism is in case you&#39;re still having trouble grasping the concept.


exactly, all dictaots use an idleogy to get into power. we use those idologies to identify them. you can argue till your blue in the face that they dont&#39; fit the defintion, but it doesnt matter.
I&#39;m not going to argue until my face is blue. Rather, I&#39;ll simply suggest that you do a little reading of introductory material on Marxism.

theraven
11th May 2006, 02:43
Of course it matters. The people who spend time complaining about "communist dictators" seem to think that these dictators and totalitarian states are models of what communists want and are in some way communist more than in name, which causes their definition of communism to become twisted. The result of that is that they are unable to disconnect these "communist dictatorships" from true communism, hence rejecting any ideology that uses the label "communism", even if the goal of that ideology is the establishment of a stateless, classless society, which is on the opposite of the spectrum from, say, North Korea.


no its just a show of what usualy happens after a communist revolution



True, we are not the final authority on what communism is or isn&#39;t and who does or does not subscribe to it. That honor goes to Karl Marx, and he would tell you that your dictatorships are not communist, or even socialist, societies. There are plenty of well-written articles here on RevLeft that can describe to you what communism is in case you&#39;re still having trouble grasping the concept.

marx oudl be the founder of communism, not the final word on it.

overlord
11th May 2006, 03:24
Capitalist dictators are authoritarian. Communist dictators are TOTALITARIAN. I&#39;ll take the capitalist one thanks. at least I won&#39;t have to hang three of his pictures in my house.


You are obviously still unable to grasp the fundamentals of communism, so I suggest you cut out the "communist dictator" stuff. Remember, communism is a stateless society, and socialism is the dictatorship of the proletariat, which means the proletariat is in control of society. If you want to understand communism at all, I suggest you stop closely associating communism with North Korea, Stalin, etc.

Really, the above argument was just plain pathetic.

A stateless classless society is basically what you will get in the aftermath of a nuclear war. It is impossible unless you are a smurf. It doesn&#39;t work with greedy humans. This is what you must grasp.

And communism can&#39;t last without a dictator. I owned a mod who could&#39;nt come up with a true communist society in history which lasts a decade without plunging into capitalism. The only way is to have a papa smurf like Castro stopping capitalist things from happening. Otherwise they&#39;re going to happen aren&#39;t they? So dictators and communists go together nicely. You must admit this at least.

Oh-Dae-Su
11th May 2006, 03:46
HAHAHAH PAPA SMURF&#33; lmao, yup, you said it best man, this is the whole concept they don&#39;t grasp, they don&#39;t understand human nature and how it works...no matter how hard you try to explain it to them and how obvious it is, they just don&#39;t grasp this idea (although im sure they do, it&#39;s just that most leftist are just unhappy with the current government and think communism is the anwser)...

Vladislav
11th May 2006, 04:07
No. It&#39;s just that we leftists care about what&#39;s happening around the world today. We don&#39;t care about living happily in wealth while people around the world are dying from starvation and other causes.

What you, dumbass capitalists don&#39;t grasp is how communism works.

You all have this concept of &#39;we&#39;re right you&#39;re wrong&#39;. It just doen&#39;t work that way.


So dictators and communists go together nicely. You must admit this at least.&#39;

No,Jeez... Learn something.

cenv
11th May 2006, 05:36
no its just a show of what usualy happens after a communist revolution
I don&#39;t consider any of these revolutions "communist revolutions". In fact, I won&#39;t consider any revolution a "communist revolution", no matter how many hammers and sickles come with it, until it produces socialism and the dictatorship of the proletariat, which is a rule by majority.


marx oudl be the founder of communism, not the final word on it.
True, but does that mean we can disregard everything he had to say? No one has "the final word" on what communism is and isn&#39;t, but the countries you refer to as "communist" are completely incompatible with Marx&#39;s "communism". I don&#39;t see how you can just ignore all of Marx&#39;s work and twist the word "communism" to such a grotesque degree.

Either way, we&#39;re just arguing semantics. I think it&#39;s pretty clear that I don&#39;t support what you call "communist dictatorships", as I am a communist, and you don&#39;t either, as you are a capitalist. Regardless of what we consider "communism" to mean, it won&#39;t change the fact that those "communist dictatorships" are absolutely nowhere near what I, as well as the rest of the sane members here, seek to create.


And communism can&#39;t last without a dictator.
Communism can&#39;t last with a dictator, because the two ideas are completely incompatible, as communism is a stateless society.


So dictators and communists go together nicely. You must admit this at least.
No, for reasons I&#39;ve already stated.


they don&#39;t understand human nature and how it works
"Human nature" is more a product of one&#39;s environment and capitalism than it is a natural trait. This is what you, surprisingly, are unable to grasp, although you must have heard this argument before several times in depth.

In conclusion, I think Vladislav summed it up very concisely and well: "learn something"&#33;

Zero
11th May 2006, 06:30
Wait... did I just hear someone say "You are not the authority on Communism."?

theraven
11th May 2006, 15:47
I don&#39;t consider any of these revolutions "communist revolutions". In fact, I won&#39;t consider any revolution a "communist revolution", no matter how many hammers and sickles come with it, until it produces socialism and the dictatorship of the proletariat, which is a rule by majority.



thats nice but so what? maybe the people in those countires do consider it one?



True, but does that mean we can disregard everything he had to say? No one has "the final word" on what communism is and isn&#39;t, but the countries you refer to as "communist" are completely incompatible with Marx&#39;s "communism". I don&#39;t see how you can just ignore all of Marx&#39;s work and twist the word "communism" to such a grotesque degree.

Either way, we&#39;re just arguing semantics. I think it&#39;s pretty clear that I don&#39;t support what you call "communist dictatorships", as I am a communist, and you don&#39;t either, as you are a capitalist. Regardless of what we consider "communism" to mean, it won&#39;t change the fact that those "communist dictatorships" are absolutely nowhere near what I, as well as the rest of the sane members here, seek to create.

what you seek to create is utopia, which by definaiton does not exist

redstar2000
11th May 2006, 21:54
Originally posted by Oh&#045;DUH&#045;Su
they don&#39;t understand human nature and how it works.

http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/9239/talkingtom9jk.jpg


http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

cenv
11th May 2006, 22:20
lmao @ redstar&#39;s pic :lol:


thats nice but so what? maybe the people in those countires do consider it one?
That doesn&#39;t make the countries communist. What are you trying to convince me of?


what you seek to create is utopia, which by definaiton does not exist
No, I don&#39;t expect perfection to be achieved. Ever. I think that was just a neat way of dodging the first paragraph of the section of my post that you quoted.

Hegemonicretribution
11th May 2006, 22:31
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 01:37 PM
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.
What about the DPRK?

That is both democratic and communist according to your logic. I must say democracy sucks accoring to this. :rolleyes:

Oh-Dae-Su
12th May 2006, 00:25
No. It&#39;s just that we leftists care about what&#39;s happening around the world today. We don&#39;t care about living happily in wealth while people around the world are dying from starvation and other causes.

:wub: AWWWWWW how sweet Mother Theresa, yeah you guys are the GOOD GUYS&#33; LIKE MAO, CASTRO, CHE, STALIN, etc....while we are the BAAAAD guys who make stupid reforms which kill millions of our own citizens from starvation, GEEEE thanks for convincing me, it&#39;s so true we don&#39;t care about what&#39;s happening in the world :lol: :rolleyes: we go into countries like South Korea and make them into worthless poor countries, and we rebuild Western Europe and made it into a hellhole where the poor starve, and we helped Japan become one of the worst countries in Asia, gee i just can&#39;t go on, im in tears .......

anyways, the truth is, yes, actually that is human nature, to live happily ever after, while others die, you don&#39;t really care about it unless it happens to you. And this you can&#39;t deny it&#39;s a human emotion, selfishness, i just don&#39;t understand where your ideas of caring and wanting to do and share things with others comes from? sure most humans don&#39;t want bad things to happen to others, that&#39;s true, BUT&#33; when it comes to material things and sharing wealth, that&#39;s what you guys don&#39;t understand (although im positive you guys go through it every day).....



What you, dumbass capitalists don&#39;t grasp is how communism works

what is there to understand buddy? ok a classless society, ummm not going to happen, you guys idolize your buddy Marx because he could fortell the future by looking at history, well you can than conclude that there has never been economic equality since the beginning of human history.....what else? a stateless society? umm ok, this is something else like what i just explaine in the previous comment, history tells us it&#39;s not going to happen, of course unless we all go back to cavemen times, and even then, there is still going to be a "leader" etc..it&#39;s just something that happens naturally with humans, take 10 people in a stranded island, whoever has the leadership qualities, he usually becomes the sort of leader of the group, it&#39;s just how humans work....and i just don&#39;t understand this stateless thing, so than how will criminals be controlled? by ourselves? so you want to take the law by your own hands? LMAO :rolleyes: yeah please moving on...



"Human nature" is more a product of one&#39;s environment and capitalism than it is a natural trait. This is what you, surprisingly, are unable to grasp, although you must have heard this argument before several times in depth.

umm , not really, human nature can&#39;t be changed no matter what, it can be surely conditioned, but thats under strict conditioning like in the book Brave New World (dystopian novel might i add)....selfishness is something that is natural, emotions are natural , how can an environment change you to not love or not be selfish? sure your mom can tell you, " Johnny you must share with your friend", BUT&#33; even still selfishness is still in you because it is a human characteristic, just like envy, things that nothing can take away....and actually as you can see i grasp it very well, and im sure you do to because it is obvious, but of course like redstar you probably don&#39;t want to admit when someone who doesn&#39;t share your ideology speaks the truth....

redstar , you know whats funny about that picture, that it&#39;s actually true...for example, you guys believe that under communism people will work happily ever after with whatever job, and will get the same things no matter what......well don&#39;t you think that if i worked in a car company, designing cars, making them etc. and you worked in a boat giving tourists a tour of the marina, that i wouldn&#39;t be jelous? i mean if i have a job that is more qualified than yours, takes exceptionally hek of a lot more skills than yours, yet you just sit your ass in a boat but get all the things i get, you don&#39;t think i would be pissed off? dude simply this society would not work...


What about the DPRK?

That is both democratic and communist according to your logic. I must say democracy sucks accoring to this.

well, same can be said about Iran, sure there are elected people to the parliament or whatever it&#39;s called, and sure there can be an elected president, and sure they can all make laws bla bla bla, but who actually picks the candidates who can run in these elections? who has the final say in all the laws? THE SUPREME LEADER&#33; so yes, in essence it is democratic, because elections do take place etc.. but fuck there is 1 guy making all the decisions at the end....thats not democratic at all..

Fistful of Steel
12th May 2006, 00:38
Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 01:43 AM

Of course it matters. The people who spend time complaining about "communist dictators" seem to think that these dictators and totalitarian states are models of what communists want and are in some way communist more than in name, which causes their definition of communism to become twisted. The result of that is that they are unable to disconnect these "communist dictatorships" from true communism, hence rejecting any ideology that uses the label "communism", even if the goal of that ideology is the establishment of a stateless, classless society, which is on the opposite of the spectrum from, say, North Korea.


no its just a show of what usualy happens after a communist revolution



True, we are not the final authority on what communism is or isn&#39;t and who does or does not subscribe to it. That honor goes to Karl Marx, and he would tell you that your dictatorships are not communist, or even socialist, societies. There are plenty of well-written articles here on RevLeft that can describe to you what communism is in case you&#39;re still having trouble grasping the concept.

marx oudl be the founder of communism, not the final word on it.
What happens to communist revolutions when they don&#39;t abolish the state, it&#39;s true they do end up like North Korea.

And I agree with you that Marx is not the final word on communism.

Janus
12th May 2006, 01:05
I am surprised Castro could accumulate that much. My guess is he gets it from the drug trade.
Yes, Castro has been delivering drugs to the US in order to accumulate wealth and subvert American society. :lol: :lol:

Since Castro is the President of Cuba, Forbes magazine must&#39;ve taken that into their account rather than trying to make an accurate account of his supposed wealth.

theraven
12th May 2006, 07:28
Originally posted by Hegemonicretribution+May 11 2006, 09:31 PM--> (Hegemonicretribution @ May 11 2006, 09:31 PM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 01:37 PM
those dictators that profess a belief in "people srevoluitions" and all that jazz. whether you agree they are communist doesn&#39;t really matter, they are self-idnetiified.
What about the DPRK?

That is both democratic and communist according to your logic. I must say democracy sucks accoring to this. :rolleyes: [/b]
except there are other exampels of republics/democarices that work far better.

Hegemonicretribution
12th May 2006, 21:20
Originally posted by Oh&#045;Dae&#045;Su+May 11 2006, 11:25 PM--> (Oh-Dae-Su @ May 11 2006, 11:25 PM) well, same can be said about Iran, sure there are elected people to the parliament or whatever it&#39;s called, and sure there can be an elected president, and sure they can all make laws bla bla bla, but who actually picks the candidates who can run in these elections? who has the final say in all the laws? THE SUPREME LEADER&#33; so yes, in essence it is democratic, because elections do take place etc.. but fuck there is 1 guy making all the decisions at the end....thats not democratic at all.. [/b]
I agree, that was my point. You can pay close detail to the word used, or you can actually look at the reality of the situation.

The word communism theoretically meant something over and above the following self labeled communist states you refer to, and it is this that everyone here refers to. Whilst you insist on using the word in a different way no headway can be made, but is that really a target of yours?

Arguments exist in context, this is a revolutionary board, it is blatantly obvious to all but the most unobservant newcomer what is meant. What is constantly repeated by restricted members here (although not all) is not an argument, but rather a cop-out of one.


theraven
except there are other exampels of republics/democarices that work far better.
O.K. if you insist upon following this through...

What about the first and earliest "capitalist" countries? They didn&#39;t start off with lots of rights, and a good standard of living and industrialisation. The process was far from pity, so is it really fair to argue against a few examples that faced far greater opposition from the outside worl than America or Britain did? You may say so, but the comparrison isn&#39;t equal.

theraven
13th May 2006, 03:08
O.K. if you insist upon following this through...

What about the first and earliest "capitalist" countries? They didn&#39;t start off with lots of rights, and a good standard of living and industrialisation. The process was far from pity, so is it really fair to argue against a few examples that faced far greater opposition from the outside worl than America or Britain did? You may say so, but the comparrison isn&#39;t equal.


britian was the first capislti economy, and its polices led it to be the most powerufl country on earth. You can directly correlate capislti economies with mores seuccesufl countires compare poland pre and post USSR, the blatic countires pre and post USSR...i can go on....a capistli economy with a stable govenrmetn will have a better economy then a socialsit or traditanl economy

overlord
13th May 2006, 06:54
Hey mna, wyh do yuo wriet liek thsi? Aer yuo trying to statr a new fashoin? Aer fingesr all thubms? Is keybord stukc? Or aer yuo spastik?

Hegemonicretribution
13th May 2006, 13:31
The "success" of Britain was possble because the opposition they faced was not as absolute. They also carried out many acts that the first world would be up in arms about if the third world even contemplated them.

If they were "let be" do you really think the countries in question would have suffered as much if it wasn&#39;t for the west&#39;s protectionism and interference.

CubaSocialista
17th May 2006, 03:34
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 05:45 AM
I am surprised Castro could accumulate that much. My guess is he gets it from the drug trade.

btw all of you, dictators are never good. COmmunism in it self just seems to give rise to them for some reason.
Almost billionaire...right.

Dictator? LOL&#33;

Alright, now that I&#39;m done laughing, and you&#39;re just beginning to do the only thing you can against one of the greatest fighters for social justice (trashing his image), there&#39;s this.&#39;



Fidel Castro Responds to Forbes Magazine Libel

I urge you to prove I have one single dollar in a foreign bank
account&#33;

MARIA JULIA MAYORAL, PEDRO DE LA HOZ AND JOSE A. DE LA OSA

Cuban president Fidel Castro challenged US President George W. Bush,
the CIA, the 33 intelligence institutions of the United States, the
thousands of banks existing in the world, and the Forbes magazine
"servants", who said he has a personal fortune of &#036;900 million
dollars, to prove he has a single dollar in a foreign bank account.

In exchange of one single piece of evidence he said he would offer
them what they have been looking for so desperately and have not been
able to achieve for almost half a century, during which they have
tried to destroy the Revolution and assassinate him through hundreds
of attempts against his life. "I will present you with everything you
have longed for," he stated. "Just show me one account, one dollar,"
he stressed.

"If you can prove that I have one dollar I will resign from all my
responsibilities; you will not need any transitions plans if you can
prove that I have one single dollar," the leader of the Cuban
Revolution emphatically stated.

They are now at a dead end street with all those lies, he pointed out
in reference to the US-based Forbes magazine that claimed he profited
from public enterprises of the island.

"What would I need that money for now if I am about to turn 80, and I
did not want it before?" He noted that during his entire life he had
had principles as a bulwark and had never abandoned them.

He said he had been calculating the amount of suitcases he would have
needed to carry all that money, and said he would have needed about a
thousand. "Who took them? In what plane? Who carried the money, who
guarded it? How could I be taking all this money out of the country
for so many years?" They have to be stupid to be claiming this, he
said, regardless of the moral arguments that could be used.

It is an insult, he said, noting that they want to depict him now as
the thieves they had always supported. "Where is Mobuto&#39;s money?
Where is the money of the Somozas?" He added that there are hundreds
of billions of stolen money in US banks. "It is all there: just look
for the money and publish a list," he said.

Fidel said that more horrifying than depicting him as stealing is
making him look as if he was betraying all those who had died in the
struggle, during the attack of Moncada Barracks, in the Sierra
Maestra mountains, in the Bay of Pigs, in the internationalist
missions, or defending the nation from terrorist acts. "It would be
like betraying entire generations of people who have struggled hard,"
he stressed.

He added that Forbes should proceed to publish a list of "bandits",
of those who have set a record in organizing the largest number of
attempts against the life of a person in all history, the
assassination plans orchestrated against him by the most powerful
nation on Earth.

He noted that while malicious slander is published against Cuba and
its leaders, the country is spearheading a program that will restore
eyesight to millions of Latin Americans through surgery.

Making reference to the thousands of patients who have benefited from
"Operacion Milagro", he wondered what those people would think when
they read the papers talking about his alleged wealth? "It is a
slander campaign to depict me as a thief," and that only pursues one
goal: to slander Cuba, to describe Castro as a thief so that no one
acknowledges what this country is doing to benefit the rest of the
world. This even when we are a country with some 25,000 healthcare
professionals working free of charge in a large number of countries.
And we can accomplish this because we have human capital, for we
certainly have 100 billion dollars worth of human capital," he
stressed.

The Cuban leader read from different media articles carrying the
slander circulated by Forbes. He noted that while these lies are
deliberately spread, "not one word is said about the 20,000 Latin
American students being trained as doctors in Cuba, or the nearly 100
000 doctors will be trained in the upcoming years."

FORBES: LIBEL SERVICE OF THE US EMPIRE

The slander and lies spread about Fidel Castro by Forbes magazine,
described as a defamation service in the hands of the US empire, were
laid bear Monday night by a group of well-known experts who took part
in a special broadcast that was transmitted by radio and television
from Havana.

The conspiracy plot on the part of the magazine&#39;s publisher and his
boss-the anti-Cuba obsessed US president, George W. Bush-was outlined
last night by a panel of experts who also noted the servility of the
US media towards the White House.

With solid arguments and evidence, each of participants demonstrated
how the US is exasperated by the advances made by the Cuban
Revolution in a meticulous, honest, fair and transparent manner.

Fidel Castro said it was disgusting to see the malicious slander
published by Forbes that included him between monarchs and dictators
on a list of the world&#39;s wealthiest leaders.

President Castro explained that the US government has frequently
resorted to such desperate accusations. He recalled how President
Bush had once said that business with Cuba "does no more than fill
the pockets of Castro and his henchman" in a pathetic attempt to
justify the blockade and appease his associates in the Miami-Cuba
mafia.

"I was not born poor. My father owned thousands of acres of land.
With the triumph of the Revolution [1959] his land was handed over to
farm workers and peasants. I have the honor of being able to say that
I have no bank accounts or assets, not even one dollar. All my
fortune, Mr. Bush, could fit in your shirt pocket."

He also spoke about how over the last year, Bush and US officials
have been caught in a serious breach by providing protection to
international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles. Bush has refused to
comment, but other officials have been forced to finally admit that
Cuba&#39;s allegations that the US was harboring this notorious criminal
were true.

The abuses hurled by Forbes have been made on several occasions; the
most recent have been repeated by a US media completely servile to
the Bush administration.

Fidel said that he hesitated about answering such ridiculous attacks
but thought that it would be useful to hear experts outline several
aspects related to the topic. Invited to the special address were
Francisco Soberon, the president of the Central Bank of Cuba, a man
whom Fidel said was one of the most honest persons he had ever met;
Abel Prieto, the minister of Culture, who is in frequent contact with
social movements and progressive intellectuals; Concepcion Campa, who
oversaw the creation of Cuba&#39;s vaccine against meningitis B; Augstin
Lage, head of the Molecular Immunology Center, one of the leading
research centers in the development of anti-cancer drugs; and
historian Eusebio Leal, a world authority in the restoration of
historic cities and at the head of the enormous task of restoring Old
Havana.

CONSPIRACY PLOTS SPUN BY THE ULTRARIGHT AND THE CIA

Soberon presented an accurate profile of the owner of Forbes
magazine, Steve Forbes. He noted that Forbes is an ultra-rightwing
businessman associated with presidents Reagan and Bush Sr. in their
efforts to destabilize the former European Socialist camp. A rich US
businessman interested in exposing the origins of far-off fortunes
while reluctant to publicly disclose the origins of his own that is
in the realm of &#036;US1.84 billion.

Francisco Soberon also detailed the blatantly inconsistent methods
used to calculate the non-existent fortune of the Cuban leader. He
noted that Forbes could have equally attributed to Bush ten percent
of the &#036;US 500 billion, profits from drug trafficking and organized
crime, that is laundered in US banks on a yearly basis with impunity.
Or the ten percent of the bribes and pay offs from the &#036;US 280.46
billion that US taxpayers have spent on the war against Iraq.

The president of the Central Bank of Cuba (BCC) suggested that
instead of spreading slander and trying to taint the reputation of
Fidel Castro, the magazine would do better to investigate the turbid
past of Bush and the way he amassed his fortune, including the buying
and selling of the Texas Rangers baseball team and their stadium, the
financial irregularities of the Harken Energy Corporation and its
links to Enron, the leading player in the largest fraud in recent US
history.

Soberon pointed to the great confidence that people around the world
have in the Cuban banking system, noting that the BCC recently issued
€400 million worth of bonds at seven percent annual interest on the
London Stock Exchange that were all bought up the same day they were
released by foreign and Cuban banks.

In the last nine years, Soberon recalled, Cuba has paid &#036;US 44
billion for imports, using among others revenues generated by the
Cuban state-owned import and export company CIMEX through the sale of
vaccines and funds from the Havana Convention Center, in addition to
other revenues that have fuelled Cuban bank accounts to pay for
national spending in education, health, security, internal defense
and reserves for natural emergencies and epidemics, among others.

He noted that with Cuba&#39;s centrally-planned economy and with a
national banking system that handles all of the hard currency
revenues, it is impossible for any high-ranking official to possess
bank accounts outside of Cuba.

"With absolute moral authority and before our people and public
opinion, we confirm that Cuban leader Fidel Castro embodies an
example of dignity and impeccable character," concluded Soberon.

LIES AS A WEAPON

"They chose the wrong millionaire," said Abel Prieto, the minister of
Culture, about Forbes magazine including Fidel Castro in its list of
wealthy leaders. He pointed to the long history of slander and lies
systematically used by the United States to try and discredit those
that do not give in to their hegemonic project.

Prieto explained that lies have become a powerful media weapon. He
compared two cases, one that made headline news and another which was
silenced.

First, he recalled the fuss made in 1986 over the made-up case of "a
supposed handicapped poet," notorious terrorist Armando Valladares,
who Ronald Reagan appointed as the US ambassador to the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva as a reward. Prieto
contrasted the fabrication with the investigation carried out around
the same time by Salvadoran activist Herbert Anaya on the torture and
crimes committed at the La Esperanza prison. None of the major media
was willing to publish information from the report or show victim&#39;s
video testimonies.

Prieto said the practice of using misinformation has reached
unprecedented extremes under the current US administration. He
pointed to the lies that justified the attack on Iraq and those
surrounding the assassination of Spanish cameraman Jose Couso and
other journalists in Baghdad.

On the positive side, the minister of Culture said that with time the
truth is making headway. He expressed his belief that the book 100
Hours with Fidel: Conversations with Ignacio Ramonet, to be presented
Tuesday in Havana, will be very useful. Ramonet was also one of the
guests during Monday&#39;s special address.

WE DON&#39;T NEED TO DEFEND OURSELVES, WE ARE HERE TO ACCUSE

"We are here to accuse those who steal and those who lie," noted the
distinguished scientist Agustin Lage. "We don&#39;t need to defend
ourselves; Fidel is defended by his life&#39;s work, his ethics and his
consistency."

Agustin Lage, who is also a parliament member, termed the latest
defamation as an insult to the Cuban people and one more example of
decades of similar conduct from the ideological adversaries of the
Revolution. The slander is based on the premise "that we are a
country of idiots or cowards without a notion of history and that we
would allow the nation to be led by a leader capable of stealing and
enriching himself," he said.

"This country took up arms precisely to overthrow the corrupt
capitalist politicians and Fidel was one of the first to take up arms
to end the tyranny," added Lage, who heads one of the scientific
research centers on the west side of the Cuban capital.

The scientist underlined that the first thing one gathers from the
Forbes article is that the authors have a total lack of knowledge
about the Cuban reality. As an example he cited the firm MEDICUBA,
listed by Forbes as one of the sources of the personal wealth of
President Fidel Castro. The firm, said Lage, doesn&#39;t export any
medicines or any other biotech product.

He said what can be clearly read between the lines of the article is
recognition that Cuba&#39;s biotech industry is bringing in sizeable
revenues, at a time when many similar companies around the world are
unable to turn a profit. Lage noted that in the case of the United
States, 70 percent of the firms in the biotech sector survive and
obtain profits via financial speculation and other businesses.

"Not one cent of the revenues obtained by this sector goes towards
increasing the personal fortune of anybody. Between 1980 and 1990
alone, more than a billion dollars was invested in the biotech
sector," said Lage, who noted that facilities based on Cuban
technology have been set up in India and China.

Lage added that the foreign currency earned helps finance public
health programs in Cuba. "If that wasn&#39;t so, I could not speak today
of all Cuban children being vaccinated free of charge against 13
diseases or all HIV/AIDS patients receiving triple therapy
medication."

He noted that revenues from export sales also make possible the
development of scientific research which requires costly equipment,
made even more expensive by the extraterritorial laws dictated by the
US government and the constant persecution of firms willing to do
business with our country.

Presently there are more than 150 research projects underway and Cuba
has already registered over 900 patents as a result of the research
in this field, he added. The success of the biotech industry also
continues to increase its contribution to the national budget.

The enemy, commented Lage, is perverse but not stupid. They know that
Cuba is an example and strive to isolate it and hamper its success at
all costs. The attack on Fidel, he concluded, is an attack on the
Revolution, on the foundations of our political system, on the Cuban
concepts of economic development.

THE WEALTH OF VIRTUES

Eusebio Leal, the Havana City historian, spoke about the lack of
interest in material wealth that characterizes Fidel Castro. He said
that for years he has kept his personal experiences regarding this to
himself but decided to reveal them on the program. Leal explained
that at the personal request of Fidel Castro, between 1991 and 1995
he distributed 11,687 gifts received by the Cuban leader from 133
nations. These included paintings, jewelry, precious stones, marble
sculptures, valuable tapestries, old arms, clothes, furniture,
cameras and personal items.

Leal, a lover of history, said he would have preferred to show the
objects in a collection related to Fidel, but recalled that the order
was for the pieces to be delivered to cultural centers and others,
without any public mention of the donation. The only place where some
of these pieces appear are in museum registers or those of other
centers that benefited.

Given the new slander from the US, Leal also revealed that the
recently inaugurated numismatic museum in Old Havana has over a
thousand ounces of gold donated by Fidel, including 920 coins from
different periods in US history.

Leal spoke about the austerity and personal example that has
characterized Fidel throughout his life. "That&#39;s how it was during
the insurrectional phase when he decided to pawn his personal
possessions to raise money for the struggle rather than asking others
for money or using the resources of his parents. The same attitude
was taken by the Castro family when the Revolution succeeded in 1959
as they voluntarily gave up their land in Biran.

"The example of Fidel&#39;s austerity, selflessness, generosity and
ethics motivated many young people to join the struggle back then and
they are still willing to do so today and in the future," said the
Havana City historian. "His human qualities are also exemplified by
the fact that he never abandoned a comrade, his high demands of
himself and the special care he takes to protect Cuba&#39;s cultural
heritage." Leal said an outstanding example "is the physical, social
and spiritual recovery underway in Old Havana."

Also speaking during the program to denounce the Forbes accusations
was Dr. Concepcion Campa, a member of the Communist Party Political
Bureau and director of the Finlay Institute. The doctor said, "Cuba&#39;s
enemies are incapable of understanding those people who do not think
of money as a God." She added that "Fidel has taught us that wealth
is not measured by who has the most, but instead by who needs the
least," something very difficult to understand by those who make wars
of aggression and leave behind long-term effects like those suffered
in Vietnam, where malformed children are still being born as a result
of the use of Agent Orange more than 30 years ago.

The exceptional researcher then described the assistance Cuba
provides to many nations by supplying vaccinations without taking
into account the political positions of the governments in those
countries. As an example she mentioned the donation made to the
Uruguayan people in 2002 to combat a meningitis epidemic at the same
time that the government of that country was siding up with the
United States to condemn Cuba at the UN Commission on Human Rights.

CubaSocialista
17th May 2006, 03:38
Originally posted by redstar2000+May 7 2006, 05:40 PM--> (redstar2000 @ May 7 2006, 05:40 PM)
Oh&#045;Dae&#045;Su
Hey at least I got my back up from actual historical accounts from TV programs.

For our readers in other countries: one of the unique characteristics of patriotic Americans is that if they see it on the dummyvision, they believe it&#39;s true. :lol:

Hard to believe, I know. :blink:

Note further that poor Oh-Dae-Su comes from a gusano family...who probably think Castro practices cannibalism. The gusano view of the world is so totally wacko that one would have to visit one their sites to believe it...no verbal description could do it justice.

In fact, you could make it into an excellent fantasy role-playing game.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif [/b]
Dude, so wrong.

Castro ate my, uh, niece and I yesterday.


Chopped us up and ate us.

Sure did.