Hacker News Reader

Comment by disgruntledphd2 | Hacker News Reader

> If anyone thinks Cuba is better off in any metric now than they would have been in that alternate reality, I’d love to hear why.

I mean, pre-Castro Cuba was basically a playground for the US rich. Like, the whole revolution was about kicking those people out.

Personally, I think that's morally justified, but I don't agree that what the US has done to them since then is morally justified. Obviously people differ on their opinions of this stuff, but collective punishment (which is what the US embargoes are) is generally regarded as a war crime.

View on HN

> Obviously people differ on their opinions of this stuff, but collective punishment (which is what the US embargoes are) is generally regarded as a war crime

The definitions really keep mutating on the left don’t they. Economic sanctions are a “war crime,” “silence is violence,” etc.

> 2019, the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute adopted an amendment to the definition of war crimes applicable in NIAC detailed in article 8(2)(e). The new article (8(2)(e)(xix) prohibits the intentional use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including the deliberate prevention of relief.

Fuel for cooking food and providing heat is necessary for survival; deliberate prevention of this aid from reaching Cuba is a war crime.

> The definitions really keep mutating on the left don’t they. Economic sanctions are a “war crime,” “silence is violence,” etc.

You may have me confused with someone else, as I have never said anything about silence is violence.

Economic sanctions are definitely a method of waging war. The loss falls mostly on the ordinary people of the country, and as such are collective punishment and war crimes.

Now, is it better than bombing the people back to the Stone Age? Definitely in the short-term, but one look at what happened to Iraq after ten years of sanctions (everyone who could left) and the impact this had on post 2003 reconstruction would seem to suggest that it's the difference between acute and chronic illnesses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com