The American Trade Embargo Against Cuba should be eliminated

D1) Rights of BusinessesFirst of all Cuba is not a terrorist organization, it is a legitimate state. Terrorist organizations do not run businesses or economies, they are unrecognizable entities. Cuba is a country however. While the government does have the power regulate commerce and place embargoes, embargoes are in itself acts of aggression and in some cases can be considered acts of war. Cuba is no longer in a state of war or hostility with the United States. As for your argument about Chavez, it doesn't matter how someone gets into office but rather it matters how they behave once they are in office. Hitler was also elected democratically so he must be a legitimate leader right? Wrong. The US trades or has traded with many unfavorable figures in the world including Chavez and Qaddafi so your argument that we don't trade with "dictators" is obviously false. It's time to stop discriminating against Cuba for ills long past. If we are going to starve dictatorships then starve the rest of them too. Besides obviously Cuba has not been "starved", the only people who have been starved are the Cuban people themselves.The blockade is still the only leverage we hold over Cuba. False. What about military leverage? Diplomatic leverage? There are plenty of other ways to keep countries in line. We give money to Pakistan, Palestine, and Venezuela to keep them in line with the US, why can't a similar tactic be used with Cuba? It can. D2) Nationalized Economy transition - movement, passage, or change from one position, state, stage, subject, concept, etc., to another. [1] Cuba has indeed moved from the position that Cubans cannot own property to the concept that they can own property. This is indeed a transition. When something so monumental happens in a communist state it can be safely said that they are transitioning. Cuba was communist to the core and the main tenant of communism is that no one owns any property so when this founding tenant is breached and changed you can say that it is a state of transition.Next you say that the only country who has an embargo on Cuba is the US which you use to spin an argument but think of it this way. No one else has sanctions on Cuba, why should we? Obviously no other countries have seen reason to embargo Cuba so why should we? If there were a whole host of countries on board your argument would make more sense but the fact that the US is the only one just shows how out of touch we are and how ancient this trade embargo really is. D3) CastroPerhaps Cuba is looking to Iran for help because they have both been slighted by the US. Cuba would have no incentive to approach Iran if there was no embargo on them. There is no reason for the US to embargo Cuba any longer because they have no alliances with countries that can threaten the US. Actually the THREAT of an embargo would be more leverage than an actual embargo because as we have seen Cuba functions without the US but with the embargo in place Cuba essentially has nothing to lose. There is absolutely no evidence to support a second Cuban missile crisis. in fact the first missile crisis ended without any violence what so ever and that was with the USSR backing Cuba. Iran is in no position to create an environment for a second missile crisis. The evidence just isn't there. D4) NegotiationsNegotiations breed friendship, understanding and closer relations with countries. Right now we have no ties to Cuba which breeds distrust and misunderstanding. Negotiations would open the door to new realizations and understandings with a transitional Cuba. R1) Out of Date Embargo The embargo was put on Cuba to strangle USSR influence and trade to the nation during the Cold War plain and simple. Now that the USSR is gone and Russia shows no interest in Cuba anymore the embargo is thus out of date. In foreign affairs you CAN'T assume things like you're saying. Right now there is NO Iran-Cuba alliance, so why treat them like there is? If you assume and treat them like that ahead of time then that pushes them to an alliance because we're already acting on something that isn't there yet pushing them to create the alliance. R2) BenefitOnce again, I see no evidence of harm by Cuba to the US. Without the USSR backing them the US could destroy them militarily. While there are rumors of a single alliance this is no reason to continuing to harm the Cuban people based on hear-say alone. You are causing undue harm to over 11 million people [2] based on an out of date embargo which you defend with rumors. It's ludicrous. R3) IdeasCuba is able to control the Internet because their Internet still runs on a dial up system making it easier to manage. [3] If the Internet was broadband, if the radio was influenced by American commercials or businesses then it would be easier for ideas to spread and for American culture to diffuse into Cuba. I could censor a dial up Internet system for goodness sake. Opening trade to Cuba would give incentive to people and businesses to use the internet to conduct business and ideas would begin to spread as technology grows. Technology plugs countries into the global network which then helps spread new ideas. The Egyptian riots and revolution that happened this past spring was organized on the internet and despite the governments best effort to censor it the idea still got out [4]. Why? Because technology is hard to control once it gets past a certain point. * Opening trade can benefit both the US and Cuba* The Castros are near death* The embargo is out of date and sustained by rumors* The people wallow in economic tar because of a stagnant economy influenced by the US embargo* There is a single rumor about ties to one anti-US country and no others. The blockade should be lifted for the good of all. [1] http://dictionary.reference.com...[2] http://www.google.com...[3] http://laredcubana.blogspot.com... [4] http://www.thedailybeast.com...