No, Groj, I was not flaming you. I, too, am against the embargo and always have been. If there are real liberty/dictatorship concerns in Cuba, which there are I argue, we should CHANGE Cuba (we can argue as to how -- I don't want to derail this by *that* much) not cut off trade with it.
However, one country's embargo is not determinative of the state of affairs in Cuba. Other countries do business with Cuba, despite the US's pressure. Having a bone to pick with the US over its reaction to the Castro dictatorship is a different (but related) topic than the topic of whether the dictatorship should be allowed to exist. If you took away the US Embargo, Castro wouldn't change much. Therefore, on the "Question of Cuba" you can't just say "Na-na, it's all the US's fault."
Skunk, on the statement "the state must have money to pay doctors." Well, Castro IS the state. And he has estates. Lots of 'em. Some nice, some not. Sleeps in a different place every night, from what I hear. Seems like your argument falls flat. And, in the capitalist alternative scenario to Castro's communism-dictatorship, the "state" doesn't pay people, so this statement would also not apply. The solution to Cuba's woes is not to give Castro more money.
Let's talk about literacy and happiness rates in Cuba. Then, let's talk about people who know there will be dire consequences if they don't fill the streets to cheer Castro when Castro tells them to. Let's talk about those who collect these numbers, and those who calculate them. In other words,
