Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

upi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 289 posts

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#161

Post by Manuel_D »

ceejayoz wrote: post #151
Manuel_D wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a tariff is indeed a tax a country imposes on goods entering its borders. I'm not sure what in my comment you think contradicts this.

> The ships being seized are doing things like flying false flags, to try and trade with Cuba without paying tariffs.

Yes, they fly false flags to avoid triggering retaliatory tariffs. If country X sells oil to Cuba than country X's goods being imported to the the US will be subject to additional tariffs.

I can see how this wording makes it sound like the US is charging a tariff on the oil entering Cuba, but that is not the case. The tariff in that quote is referring to the tariffs the US is promising to place on counties that don't participate in the embargo.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#162

Post by WarmWash »

j_maffe wrote: post #149
WarmWash wrote: post #84

There is a point where you are so weak, and your opponent is strong, that the best outcome for everyone on the whole is for you to just capitulate. Surrender. I don't know if there is something I am missing, but to me, the "bad guy" in a situation like this is the one holding onto power at everyone else's (extreme) expense, throwing their own team into the fire to keep their power in place as long as possible.

Great victim blaming

The victims are the innocent people being shredded in the middle of it, I don't see where I am blaming them

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#163

Post by kyboren »

pasquinelli wrote: post #141
daedrdev wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuba let 20% of the population leave in 2020-24 so that they would have fewer dissenters in the country who might overthrow the government. Thats a higher rate of population per year than the peak of the great Irish famine

if they don't let people leave to prevent total state collapse then they're starving their own people (by means of the american trade embargo); if they do let people leave, it's to tighten their stranglehold on the country.

Any way you slice it, such an exodus is never the sign of a well-managed country.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#164

Post by WarmWash »

anigbrowl wrote: post #138
WarmWash wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US could not care less about Cuba being communist. They care a lot about Cuba being "open door communist bros" with the USSR, and now with China. If China moves on Taiwan, and the US moves to defend, and then a bunch of Chinese missiles hit the East Coast, people will wonder what the government was doing letting China set up camp right on our door step.

The irony of saying we should have the option to defend Taiwan but we can't tolerate China posing a threat in our backyard.

It's about as ironic as defending your goal while also trying to get the ball in the opponents goal. I suppose in some way it's ironic, but it's also the only beneficial way to play the game.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#165

Post by Manuel_D »

skeledrew wrote: post #145
Manuel_D wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the link closely, nowhere does it actually say the US is employing military force to stop ships from docking in Cuba - that's what a blockade is. The author of the piece is essentially trying to redefine "blockade" to mean "embargo". Again, the ships that actually were boarded were doing illegal things like flying false flags to try and continue to trade with Cuba without triggering retaliatory tariffs.

> continue to trade with Cuba without triggering retaliatory tariffs Why are there "retaliatory tariffs" in the first place? Why is the US forcefully inserting itself into affairs with which it should have no concern? Or are you saying it's the US's concern because... what? They're the world's watchdog and ultimate authority on right behavior? Other countries trading with the countries they've embargoed should rightl…

Because the US wants to economically isolate Cuba to prod the single party authoritarian regime into liberalizing. It's fine if you think that's a bad thing. My only point is that it's not a blockade, it's an embargo. Countries have the option to trade with Cuba and live with the additional tariffs on their exports to the US. Under an actual blockade, that option doesn't exist. The Royal Navy didn't let ships into Germany during WW1 and slap their flag countries with tariffs. No, they boarded and seized the vessels because this was an actual blockade.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#166

Post by norwegiandemon »

simpaticoder wrote: post #65
daedrdev wrote: post #38

The US has had an embargo on Cuba for a long time that exempted Food and Medicine, while other countries freely traded with Cuba. However, under the Trump admin it has turned into a de-facto blockade of all fuel, which really isn't the embargo, it's a new blockade by the US against Cuba. So I don't get why we blame it on the embargo when the current problems are clearly caused by the blockade. Cuba's previous economi…

Yeah it's crazy when the CCP expresses frustration that you're not doing more capitalism... As an aside, I'm surprised that computers wouldn't make centralized economies more doable. It might not be good but at least the people wouldn't be starving and dying because hospitals are out of electricity.

This was tried with computers, and failed. In Bolivia I believe.

I just watch a video on YouTube recently (don't have the link handy but a simple search should find it no problem) that explains why it's not a computational problem and when tried again with AI it still fails.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#167

Post by akramachamarei »

Manuel_D wrote: post #160
j_maffe wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is cut off from oil. it is effectively an oil-blockade, except for the one shipment the US allowed through, as reported by the media. Sorry, I'm done talking with someone who's this pedantic, it's not good for my blood pressure. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/29/us-russian-o...

But it's cut off from oil because other countries refuse to trade with Cuba. Not because the US Navy is blocking vessels (besides those flying false flags) from docking with Cuba. If you really believe there's no distinction between an embargo and a blockade then you should have just correctly used the term "embargo". This isn't pedantry, this is the difference between an act of war and an economic move.

I would further note that, if one is looking for something to dislike about the embargoes, being a blockade isn't necessary. In particular, (classical) liberals should be disturbed by countries forcing private shippers to participate in "their" country's embargo. E.g., would the US attempt to stop and American company from trading with Cuba?

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#168

Post by akramachamarei »

OutOfHere wrote: post #131
imvgikviktbt wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does US imperialism have anything to do with the fact that the Cuban government refuses to allow their citizens to buy and sell goods freely?

Even the US government doesn't allow its citizens to trade freely, so what nonsense are you complaining about...

Serious posts are generally preferred on HackerNews, but jokes can be okay if they're funny.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#169

Post by Manuel_D »

j_maffe wrote: post #132
Manuel_D wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a blockade. Any country around the world is free to sail their cargo ships to Cuba and trade with Cubans. This will in turn, trigger tariffs against them in the US, but if countries really want to trade with Cuba they can. A blockade is carried out through military force. Under a blockade ships are physically prevented from docking with the blockaded country, even if they're legally registered. If you want t…

It is effectively an oil blockade, and it's illegal under international law. Being this pedantic about how the US justifies its actions shows zero understanding for how these things tend to be done. The purpose of a system is what it does.

No, it's not effectively an oil blockade. Countries have the option to trade with Cuba and risk whatever retaliatory tariffs the US promises to put on countries that ship oil to Cuba. These counties choose to refrain from trade with Cuba because the value they get out of exporting goods to the US exceeds the value of trade with Cuba. But if they decided otherwise, that option is available to them.

A blockade is an act of war where a country physically stops vessels from entering port in the target of the blockade. There is no choice in a blockade, the country enforcing the blockade is acting unilaterally

If you really think this is a distinction without a difference, then you could've just used the word "embargo" and avoided this exchange. But you didn't, you chose to call it a blockade, which is incorrect.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#170

Post by baseballdork »

ceejayoz wrote: post #109
Manuel_D wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. But the point remains, the US is free to impose a tariff on countries that sell oil to Cuba.

So it's not "a tax that a country imposes on goods entering its borders" now?

It seems fairly obvious that what happens is a tariff is applied to the items entering the US and not the oil going to Cuba.

If you trade oil with cuba, then any trade with the US will be subject to the tariff.

Post reply on HN