• KingSlareXIV@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, they don’t have to be allowed in international waters, you just need to get all the planet’s seafaring countries to dedicate all of their naval resources to a blockade of the US.

    The cheaper option is to realize that the USN is generally pretty serious about enforcing freedom of navigation in a way essentially noone else is able to, which is a net positive for the planet. Even when you factor in some of the shady activities and plain old fuckups that they are occasionally involved in.

    Frankly I’d be thrilled if China would actually act like the modern global power they clearly want to become, rather than joining Russia in some 1800s imperial LARPing vs the rest of the world.

    • Gay_Tomato [they/them, it/its]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Frankly I’d be thrilled if China would actually act like the modern global power they clearly want to become, rather than joining Russia in some 1800s imperial LARPing vs the rest of the world.

      The rest of the world is at worse neutral to at least one of the two. Oh! I see, you don’t actually mean the entire world just the only countries you think matter us-foreign-policy

    • Yllych [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      love to enforce freedom of navigation by seizing Iranian/Venezuelan oil tankers, enforcing embargoes on Cuba and.the DPRK.

      also love to wave around the word imperialism to describe state enemies when the us has fit that definition for the last 100 years.

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is just peak morshupls It’s different when we do it cope

      enforcing freedom of navigation in a way essentially noone else is able to, which is a net positive for the planet

      The planet: us-foreign-policy

      1800s larping

      Who’s got the biggest system of prison slavery in world history, again?

      Who’s bringing back child labor?

      • KingSlareXIV@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am mostly sure the naval blockade of Cuba ended well before I was born, so there is zero freedom of navigation issue happening currently.

        The embargo only applies to US companies, we aren’t stopping other countries from continuing to trade witch Cuba.

        I mean, it’s stupid as hell, and will never work, but that’s about the extent of it.

        • Teekeeus [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          From the guardian, a liberal mainstream publication

          https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/03/cuba-us-embargo-must-end

          In short, the US embargo impacts every aspect of life on the island – and that is the precisely the point. Sixty years ago on this day, President John F Kennedy introduced Proclamation 3447, Embargo on All Trade with Cuba, designed to isolate Cuba and stop the spread of so-called Sino-Soviet Communism “Every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba,” the assistant secretary of state, Lester D Mallory, wrote in an April 1960 memo. The goal of the Kennedy administration was clear: “To bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”

          Today, Joe Biden lives up to Kennedy’s legacy and the ambitions of his Cuban embargo. Not only has the president refused to undo the extraordinary sanctions imposed by the Trump administration, reneging on his campaign promise to restore diplomatic relations and leaving Cuba on the list of “state sponsors of terrorism”. He has also doubled down on the embargo, tightening restrictions and imposing a host of new sanctions against the Cuban government.

          Both the Biden administration and its Republican opposition claim that these measures are targeted at the regime, rather than the Cuban people. But the evidence to the contrary is not only anecdotal. The UN estimates that the embargo has cost Cuba over $130bn in damages – costs that are compounded by the penalties imposed by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) on Cuba’s allies and investors. Between April 2019 and March 2020 alone, OFAC penalties amounted to over $2.4bn, targeting banks, insurance firms, energy companies and travel agencies alike.

          The effect of the embargo is therefore both local and global: it cripples the Cuban economy and undermines the multilateral system that the US claims to lead.

        • ButtBidet [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          The trade embargo, not the naval blockade. The trade embargo that the UN General Assembly has called illegal multiple times. Like how ships docking into US ports can’t trade with Cuba, or businesses trading with Cuba have to go through massive paperwork hoops to prove that they have zero American shareholders. Or like how Cuba has to import basic medical supplies from the other end of the world.

        • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The embargo has been active since 1960 and has never ended, I’m not sure where you got the idea that it had stopped. And yeah, while it doesn’t directly prevent anyone else from trading with Cuba, it does prohibit anyone who trades with Cuba (or even just enters a Cuban port for maintenance) from trading with the US for the next 180 days, and considering the US is such a major trading partner, that heavily disincentivizes other nations from trading with them, don’t you think?

          Either way it’s petty as hell and absolutely still happening, it infringes on Cuba’s right to self determination, and is not what I would call “generally pretty serious about enforcing freedom of navigation” by any stretch of the imagination.

          • KingSlareXIV@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Its amusing how this thread went from the legitimacy of various naval exercises and then shifted to trade policy when that didn’t pan out, which is an entirely different animal, its more of an elephant than a zebra. (It ain’t black and white, definitely grey.)

            Trying to get me to defend the Cuba trade embargo ain’t gonna happen, because it really is pointless and harmful. But I like how its conveniently ignored that the rest of the world could easily more than cover what the US refuses to send to Cuba. The US Navy wouldn’t stop them from doing so, because the blockade ended decades ago.

            But oddly enough, that doesn’t happen. I wonder why not? Because, oh no, what would the world do without more of those sweet, sweet dollars??? Yeah, never mind the ethics, one can’t forgo profits from trade with the US, so let’s go fuck the Cubans right along with the Americans, and keep our citizens fat and happy with a steady supply of Levis, Big Macs, and movies. But, you know, lets continue paying lip service to how bad it is while making money hand over fist in complicity.

            A truly astounding amount of hypocrisy. The US has plenty of hypocrisy to go around too, but at least I am not going to try to defend it.