Raul a no show at the airport to meet Obama.

[mk05]

Maybe, but any regime's true goal is power, and how to secure/maintain that power. It would be bad business for Castro if the embargo fell. The success of Cuba has to come from Castro - and no one else. I seriously doubt that the Castro regime wants publicized American influence in Cuba, and the idea of freedoms to penetrate the status quo there. I think Castro is just fine with the silent help it receives in terms of subsidies, foods, and other supplies from the US.

At least that is how I interpret Castro, as an outsider looking in.

[MPS]

To get back to the original question.

Barack Obama flew out of Havana for a state visit to Argentina last Tuesday.

There is currently $180m worth of trade between the U.S. and Cuba.

Estimates are that trade will be between $1 bn and $4 bn annually when the embargo falls. Cuba has 11m people.

Currently there is about $10bn worth of trade annually (imports and exports) between US and Argentina. Argentina has 40m people.

Why isn't anyone complaining that Argentina's president Mauricio Macri didn't meet President Obama at the airport either?

There is protocol and politicking behind all these occasions. When Barack Obama came here in 2011, a huge occasion for Ireland, our President wasn't at the airport to meet him either. Nobody complained about that at the time.

It's worth realising that maybe there are reasons why certain people are complaining specifically about the reception in Cuba and not all the others.

There are two reasons for the complaints. One, this was a very historic visit and two, Raul goes to greet everyone at the airport.

This was a power play done on purpose.

[LGC]

This was a power play done on purpose.

Precisely

[Ken Gargett]

There are two reasons for the complaints. One, this was a very historic visit and two, Raul goes to greet everyone at the airport.

This was a power play done on purpose.

and the actual evidence for this is?

[MPS]

and the actual evidence for this is?

Dude you have issues.

[PigFish]

just on this point, currently we clearly cannot feed, clothe, house and educate everyone, sustainably or otherwise. and the population is increasing at a terrifying rate. it is just going to get worse.

Ken I think that this was likely written in a rhetorical sense, but it appears to me, that it emphasizes some of our differences.

The concept (yes I am back to that) that "mankind is a problem" that "we" collectively are responsible for everything, LEADS to greater problems, and those are the "Cliff Notes" that my friends are asking for.

I am not responsible for this... I have not requested that other parts of the world reproduce themselves into any state. If you look closer at the governments of many of these people, the ones that cannot feed themselves, you can clearly link their dilemmas to the the tyranny state under which many of them live.

The world cannot be mastermind controlled. MAN was not meant to be mastermind controlled. When mankind IS mastermind controlled, masterminds move man into the worst situation that man can achieve, and as a result worst atrocities of one man to another have been committed.

That was the point of my post. Those are the Cliff Notes.

I am less concerned about the affects than I am the cure.

Cheers mate! -Ray

[Ken Gargett]

Dude you have issues.

seriously? that is the best response you've got. i have issues? because a little thing like actual evidence, rather than irrational endless hatred, would be nice?

i realise that there is no chance of many people with a view on this changing their opinion, and that goes both ways, but is it necessary to make it personal, simply because you are bereft of any logical argument? try growing up.

[Ken Gargett]

Ken I think that this was likely written in a rhetorical sense, but it appears to me, that it emphasizes some of our differences.

The concept (yes I am back to that) that "mankind is a problem" that "we" collectively are responsible for everything, LEADS to greater problems, and those are the "Cliff Notes" that my friends are asking for.

I am not responsible for this... I have not requested that other parts of the world reproduce themselves into any state. If you look closer at the governments of many of these people, the ones that cannot feed themselves, you can clearly link their dilemmas to the the tyranny state under which many of them live.

The world cannot be mastermind controlled. MAN was not meant to be mastermind controlled. When mankind IS mastermind controlled, masterminds move man into the worst situation that man can achieve, and as a result worst atrocities of one man to another have been committed.

That was the point of my post. Those are the Cliff Notes.

I am less concerned about the affects than I am the cure.

Cheers mate! -Ray

ray, i don't disagree with you at all re control, as you detail it. far from it. and i am not looking to lay blame on anyone. my comments are more about the actual situation. to me, and without in anyway attributing blame (as for cures, i wish), i am firmly convinced that the world, as a general comment, is horribly overpopulated. and i can only, again without blame, see this as getting worse.

if only any one of us had a cure (sans control, of course).

[MPS]

seriously? that is the best response you've got. i have issues? because a little thing like actual evidence, rather than irrational endless hatred, would be nice?

i realise that there is no chance of many people with a view on this changing their opinion, and that goes both ways, but is it necessary to make it personal, simply because you are bereft of any logical argument? try growing up.

Try reading Ken and get a life. My job isn't to spoon feed you. Give it up already it's embarrassing.

[Fugu]

That's the actual benefit and shortcoming with Cliffs Notes, Ray - rough (sometimes undue) simplification....


(But I get what you mean and respect your view! )

Cheers

[PigFish]

ray, i don't disagree with you at all re control, as you detail it. far from it. and i am not looking to lay blame on anyone. my comments are more about the actual situation. to me, and without in anyway attributing blame (as for cures, i wish), i am firmly convinced that the world, as a general comment, is horribly overpopulated. and i can only, again without blame, see this as getting worse.

if only any one of us had a cure (sans control, of course).

I understand this completely. I am guilty (as I often do this) as using a post (not just yours) as an example to clarify my position.

Hell, I don't even remember how the thread got here....! -LOL But ultimately, when someone makes a sweeping statement such as "the world is overpopulated" my skin crawls. Again, I am not going to debate ones Excel tables, it is not that important to me. But when I hear this stuff, it harkens to a day where eugenics was a common "highbrow" solution to the problem, and this is from the last century.

My comments, not directed at you (personally) were to attempt to explain where history has taken this "as an alleged problem" before! As stated. I reject the premise for many reasons. The main reason is that history has proven that the solution is worse than the problem!!!

Cheers mate. -Ray

[PigFish]

That's the actual benefit and shortcoming with Cliffs Notes, Ray - rough (sometimes undue) simplification....

(But I get what you mean and respect your view! )

Cheers

Don't patronize Paul, no need. I DON'T RESPECT YOURS!!! -LOL

(Read with levity, I am kidding of course!)

Hugs and kisses mate!!! -LOL -R

[Fugu]

Don't patronize Paul, no need. I DON'T RESPECT YOURS!!! -LOL

(Read with levity, I am kidding of course!)

No, no, I got that... !

[Ken Gargett]

Try reading Ken and get a life. My job isn't to spoon feed you. Give it up already it's embarrassing.

i've read it.

you made a claim. i asked if you had any actual evidence. apparently not. at least none that i can see other than speculation and innuendo. you hate the castros. we all get that. i have no problem with that but it does not provide any assistance in proving your allegations.

instead, it is easier for you to get personal. i certainly do not need to be spoon fed by someone who has shown absolutely no intelligence on a topic.

i've seen no evidence other than that you've taken a position you are determined to stick to whether right or wrong - which says more about you than anything else. what is embarrassing is the fact that you are so obviously out of your depth.

[MPS]

i've read it.

you made a claim. i asked if you had any actual evidence. apparently not. at least none that i can see other than speculation and innuendo. you hate the castros. we all get that. i have no problem with that but it does not provide any assistance in proving your allegations.

instead, it is easier for you to get personal. i certainly do not need to be spoon fed by someone who has shown absolutely no intelligence on a topic.

i've seen no evidence other than that you've taken a position you are determined to stick to whether right or wrong - which says more about you than anything else. what is embarrassing is the fact that you are so obviously out of your depth.

Yes and because you say it's so it must be true.

I've backed up what I have said with articles and photos. What have you backed up yours with?

You also seem to make many assumptions about me. What does that say about you?

I'm done talking to you about this issue. Best wishes Ken!

[PigFish]

Gentlemen... you cannot fight in here, this is the War Room!

I have a rule! If you are going to fight on threads your post must contain 5000 characters or more! -LOL

-Piggy

[Ken Gargett]

Yes and because you say it's so it must be true.

I've backed up what I have said with articles and photos. What have you backed up yours with?

You also seem to make many assumptions about me. What does that say about you?

I'm done talking to you about this issue. Best wishes Ken!

you mean you'll have the last word and run away. are you 12? do we let 12 year olds on the forum?

photos? of something that didn't happen. that would have every jury falling over themselves to convict. you have come up with nothing but speculation. absolutely not one sliver of genuine evidence. you have not backed anything up.

but if we get serious, you or anyone holding similar views, can you show me a single report from anyone in the administration or a respected journalist (not people like us on a forum or journos with axes to grind) that supports your allegations. just one? then we can start taking it seriously and i'd be happy to take another look. so far, no one has done that.

or you can run away.

[MPS]

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/03/20/obama-cuba-trip/

"Wielding an umbrella on a rainy Havana afternoon, Obama and his family stepped off of Air Force One and were greeted by top Cuban officials — but not Raul Castro. The Cuban leader frequently greets major world figures upon their arrival at Jose Marti International Airport, but was absent on the tarmac. Instead, he planned to greet Obama on Monday at the Palace of the Revolution."

You think they have an axe to grind?

[Fugu]

Gents, here is the official version - you may believe the admin statement or not, it's up to you. But one thing is clear, not all of those "others" whom Raúl is greeting at the airport do usually meet with dissidents at the same occasion.... It was certainly not an easy task for both sides. And both of them certainly didn't want to risk a loss of face. I wouldn't overstress the "airport case".

Associated Press | March 22, 2016, at 4:30 p.m.

HAVANA (AP) — The Latest on President Barack Obama's trip to Cuba (all times local):

4:15p.m.

Cuban President Raul Castro has shown up on the tarmac at Jose Marti International Airport to see President Barack Obama off after a whirlwind three-day trip that began with some interpreting a snub when Castro did not greet Air Force One.

Administration officials emphasized at the start of the visit that it was never contemplated or discussed that Castro would be at the airport.

The send-off is a warm gesture that comes after the two leaders sparred at a press conference and frankly discussed longstanding disagreements between the two nations. The two sat next to each other during the early innings of Tuesday's exhibition baseball game before Obama departed for a trip to Argentina.

And some further reading to get an idea of the atmosphere behind the three-day-trip scenes.

[Ken Gargett]

Gents, here is the official version - you may believe the admin statement or not, it's up to you. But one thing is clear, not all of those "others" whom Raúl is greeting at the airport do usually meet with dissidents at the same occasion.... It was certainly not an easy task for both sides. And both of them certainly didn't want to risk a loss of face. I wouldn't overstress the "airport case".

Associated Press | March 22, 2016, at 4:30 p.m.

HAVANA (AP) — The Latest on President Barack Obama's trip to Cuba (all times local):

4:15p.m.

Cuban President Raul Castro has shown up on the tarmac at Jose Marti International Airport to see President Barack Obama off after a whirlwind three-day trip that began with some interpreting a snub when Castro did not greet Air Force One.

Administration officials emphasized at the start of the visit that it was never contemplated or discussed that Castro would be at the airport.

The send-off is a warm gesture that comes after the two leaders sparred at a press conference and frankly discussed longstanding disagreements between the two nations. The two sat next to each other during the early innings of Tuesday's exhibition baseball game before Obama departed for a trip to Argentina.

And some further reading to get an idea of the atmosphere behind the three-day-trip scenes.

i think this pretty much covers it. i understand raul does occasionally meet leaders at the airport. i have no doubt that in those cases, as here, that would be arranged way in advance. we have a report from the administration which pours cold water all over any suggestion of any supposed snub. wasn't aware he saw him off but by doing so, surely that helps put those suggestions to rest. i still think this is the biggest non-event imaginable and whipped up by those with other agendas. i'm not belittling those other agendas in any way but i don't buy any controversy or any snub. all of this would have been arranged way in advance. even from those keen to push their own agendas, i have seen nothing that suggests this was a unilateral decision by raul. i have seen nothing to suggest that he pulled out of previously set arrangements.

some may have expected bowing and scraping by the cuban leader. was never a possibility. some may have expected bowing and scraping by the american side, given they put the embargo in place in the first place. again, never a possibility. it was a visit that seems to have gone as well as it could. those that oppose even this have taken the most insignificant moment and tried to blow it into a fight.

[wabashcr]

I don't think there's any reason to believe Obama expected Raul at the airport on arrival, so I wouldn't call it a snub. But it's absolutely a statement on Raul's part. Arriving at the airport would set the tone for a friendly, cheerful visit, and despite the historical significance and warming relations, the two countries are still very much at odds with each other. Raul is going to stand firm publicly, and we'll see plenty of posturing to that effect in the coming months. Not showing at the airport was part of that, and I don't think anyone should feel aggrieved by it. Hell, look at Fidel's recent musings. That was far more offensive than anything Raul did, but everyone just kind of expects that kind of posturing from him.

Every facet of Obama's visit was heavily calculated by both sides. The airport thing definitely meant something, but I don't think it meant too much.

[Zigatoh]

Not sure why the fuss, it's politics, and we all know what that smells like.

[Ken Gargett]

The airport thing definitely meant something, but I don't think it meant too much.

i suspect it meant very very little on both sides. i agree with that. all sorted ages ago.

has anyone considered the fact that, as obama and his team have made very very clear, this was a visit to cuba and the cuban people, during which they were meeting raul and accordingly, it could very well have been obama's team that insisted raul not be at the airport, in case it sent the wrong message to the cuban people. that seems just as likely as raul decided to snub obama. and i am sure obama would not want that to be made public.

of course, i only have exactly the same amount of evidence for this as anyone suggesting a snub does. that is, bugger all. just speculation.

[wabashcr]

i suspect it meant very very little on both sides. i agree with that. all sorted ages ago.

has anyone considered the fact that, as obama and his team have made very very clear, this was a visit to cuba and the cuban people, during which they were meeting raul and accordingly, it could very well have been obama's team that insisted raul not be at the airport, in case it sent the wrong message to the cuban people. that seems just as likely as raul decided to snub obama. and i am sure obama would not want that to be made public.

of course, i only have exactly the same amount of evidence for this as anyone suggesting a snub does. that is, bugger all. just speculation.

I would think that unlikely, only because I find it hard to believe Raul would acquiesce to Americans telling him to stay away from his airport. Anything is possible, but to me the explanation that makes the most sense is that it was just a small sign of political posturing by Raul. I think he was trying to publicly set the tone for the visit, and convey the message that it's not all rainbows and unicorns from the Cuban government's perspective. It's not really even so much that his absence sent a strong message, it's that his presence would have sent the opposite message.

[Ken Gargett]

I would think that unlikely, only because I find it hard to believe Raul would acquiesce to Americans telling him to stay away from his airport. Anything is possible, but to me the explanation that makes the most sense is that it was just a small sign of political posturing by Raul. I think he was trying to publicly set the tone for the visit, and convey the message that it's not all rainbows and unicorns from the Cuban government's perspective. It's not really even so much that his absence sent a strong message, it's that his presence would have sent the opposite message.

entirely possible. or neither wanted to attend. or... who knows. we are all speculating. if anyone has evidence....

i wonder more about the raul snub when i hear that he was at the airport to see obama off. seems odd if he wanted to convey that message because that rather stuffs it up.

i wonder if it suited both sides for raul not to be there at arrival.