Guess we might as well have the next Trumperialism thread.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07j40dyx53o
QuoteMillions without electricity as Cuba's power grid collapses
Millions in Cuba have been left without power after the national electricity grid collapsed on Monday, the country's power operator says.
Much of the island including the capital, Havana, was plunged into darkness, with streets only illuminated by headlamps and battery-powered lights on Monday.
UNE, Cuba's grid operator, said early on Tuesday morning that it was gradually restoring electricity to provinces and cities around the country.
It is the latest in a series of widespread blackouts to hit the Caribbean island, where aging electricity infrastructure and chronic fuel shortages have been exacerbated by a US blockade on oil shipments to the communist-run nation.
Coupled with shortages of food and medicine, the situation has triggered rare public dissent in the form of street protests, which continued with people banging pots and pans in central Havana on Monday.
Unauthorised demonstrations are illegal in Cuba and those who defy the ban risk being jailed.
"It is not just the blackout," 26-year-old Havana resident Lázaro Hernández told news agency Reuters.
"There is no water because there is no electricity to run the pumps. There is no electricity, no food, no oil, no fuel, and private businesses have high prices because everything is going up now, since they have to move their goods by truck and transport. All of this is really very bad."
Meanwhile, Dayana Machin, also 26 and from Havana, was unsurprised by the blackout. "We're already used to living with this," she said.
Cuba, an island of around 10 million people, relies heavily on fuel imports.
Its regional ally Venezuela was believed to have sent around 35,000 barrels of oil a day - about half Cuba's oil needs - until its supplies were cut off following the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by the US in early January.
US President Donald Trump has also threatened tariffs on any country supplying oil to Cuba.
It has been three months since the nation has received an oil shipment, Cuba's president, Miguel Díaz-Canel, said on Friday.
With the government in Venezuela now appearing to co-operate with the US, the Trump administration has turned its attention to the Latin American nation the US has shared the most animosity with since its revolution in 1959.
Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that he believed he would have the "honour of taking Cuba".
"Whether I free it, take it, I could do anything I want with it, you want to know the truth," he said. "They're a very weakened nation right now."
He previously threatened a "friendly takeover" of Cuba and has urged it to "make a deal" or face unspecified consequences.
Díaz-Canel confirmed last week that his government was in the initial stages of talks with the Trump administration to resolve their differences.
At the same time, the Cuban government released 51 prisoners in what it described as a demonstration of "goodwill".
To mitigate the impact of the severe fuel shortage - that has also affected air travel and, with it, tourism to the island - Cuba has increased production of domestic crude and gas, as well as solar generation.
But its actions have yet to quell protests among Cubans, for whom power cuts have been a persistent source of public discontent.
A protest in the central city of Morón on Saturday devolved into a small group ransacking a local Communist Party office.
QuoteAt the same time, the Cuban government released 51 prisoners in what it described as a demonstration of "goodwill"
The Cubans haven't learned the lesson the rest of us now know. Showing goodwill to the Americans at this point in history marks your nation as the next victim.
This has to be a crime against humanity. Basically the US is starving an entire nation of the resources to sustain itself. An embargo is one thing, but prohibiting other nations from supplying it is another.
Say what you want about Cuba, the nation's people do not deserve this.
Will the Trump administration ever face justice for their crimes. I know Trump pre-empted prosecution for anything he does while in office; but what about everyone else?
Quote from: Josephus on Today at 09:29:23 AMThis has to be a crime against humanity. Basically the US is starving an entire nation of the resources to sustain itself. An embargo is one thing, but prohibiting other nations from supplying it is another.
Say what you want about Cuba, the nation's people do not deserve this.
Will the Trump administration ever face justice for their crimes. I know Trump pre-empted prosecution for anything he does while in office; but what about everyone else?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ghvd2WwWUAAtEJ5.jpg)
Quote from: Josephus on Today at 09:29:23 AMThis has to be a crime against humanity. Basically the US is starving an entire nation of the resources to sustain itself. An embargo is one thing, but prohibiting other nations from supplying it is another.
Say what you want about Cuba, the nation's people do not deserve this.
Will the Trump administration ever face justice for their crimes. I know Trump pre-empted prosecution for anything he does while in office; but what about everyone else?
Nobody worries that Trump took the US into a war in support of a PM charged with war crimes. I am not sure anyone will worry too much about this further violation.
To quote Nemik from Andor S1:
"The pace of oppression outstrips our ability to understand it, and that is the real trick of the Imperial Thought Machine. It's easier to hide behind 40 atrocities than a single incident."
Presidential pardons do not immunize the recipient from prosecution for violations of the laws of war where the venue is outside the United States. Nor does it prevent extradition.
This IMO is a very live issue for Pete Hegseth, who is implicated in several war crimes already.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on Today at 09:41:43 AMPresidential pardons do not immunize the recipient from prosecution for violations of the laws of war where the venue is outside the United States. Nor does it prevent extradition.
This IMO is a very live issue for Pete Hegseth, who is implicated in several war crimes already.
While you are technically correct, it would be near impossible to extradite someone like him from the United States. A US court would need to order that extradition. How much faith do you have such an order would actually be made?
I realize how tempting it is to fall back on the before times legal norms. But all evidence is to the contrary in your country.
I might start to think Trump did not deserve that FIFA Peace Prize. <_<
Prediction: the US makes a poo-poo and goes cap in hand to NATO for help.
Quote from: The Brain on Today at 09:56:23 AMPrediction: the US makes a poo-poo and goes cap in hand to NATO for help.
FFS, what are you doing here, and not raising zombie Olof Palme? :hug:
Quote from: Norgy on Today at 10:00:27 AMQuote from: The Brain on Today at 09:56:23 AMPrediction: the US makes a poo-poo and goes cap in hand to NATO for help.
FFS, what are you doing here, and not raising zombie Olof Palme? :hug:
I'm not a fan of Cuba's regime.
Quote from: crazy canuck on Today at 09:47:28 AMWhile you are technically correct, it would be near impossible to extradite someone like him from the United States. A US court would need to order that extradition. How much faith do you have such an order would actually be made?
There is no way it would happen now, Trump would block it.
I could see it happen under some future administration, sure, assuming an investigation obtained sufficient evidence. If a proper request was made by a country with a US treaty and a functional legal system, and if DOJ approved, the courts would be unlikely to block it.
The functionality of the legal system of the foreign country making the request is not the problematic issue
The legal system is functioning OK. Except for the Supreme Court. And the Immigration Courts. And the District court in Palm Beach.
Oh and also the Department of Justice. But the staff at this point is already so incompetent they can't do too much damage. The US Attorneys' offices are still mostly OK.
Except for DC, New Jersey, Virginia, Minnesota, maybe a few others.
Otherwise, it's not too bad.
So an order is made by a still functioning part of the American Legal system. That order gets stayed pending appeal to the US Supreme Court. And then the US Supreme Court grants the appeal with much hand waving. I don't see a lot of nations wanting to waste the expense of going through that charade.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on Today at 10:22:09 AMI could see it happen under some future administration, sure, assuming an investigation obtained sufficient evidence.
I don't see that happening ever. If the Trump regime is going to face legal consequences for what they have done, it's going to be in the US legal system. Even the most internationalist Democrats have had a "good for thee but not for me" attitude towards the ICC and similar institutions. I think it would take the US losing a war on the level of Germany in World War II for a senior American official to face an international tribunal.
No country ever did submit an extradition request for Kissinger.
It would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.
Quote from: Jacob on Today at 11:51:12 AMIt would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.
Have them fall out of windows or choke on veggies. Works well enough.
Quote from: Jacob on Today at 11:51:12 AMIt would be wonderful to see those Americans who've committed crimes against humanity be held accountable for their actions, but I think it is very unlikely to happen.
And I'm sure there's a lot of bad actors around the world who are perking up to see if this becomes normalized now.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on Today at 11:49:44 AMNo country ever did submit an extradition request for Kissinger.
And? The Americans do not and have never recognized the jurisdiction of the ICC. And the likelihood of an American court ever ordering the extradition of an American because of alleged war crimes or crimes against humanity is zero. So I ask again, why would any nation waste time and expense going through the motions when the result is inevitable?
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on Today at 11:20:25 AMQuote from: The Minsky Moment on Today at 10:22:09 AMI could see it happen under some future administration, sure, assuming an investigation obtained sufficient evidence.
I don't see that happening ever. If the Trump regime is going to face legal consequences for what they have done, it's going to be in the US legal system. Even the most internationalist Democrats have had a "good for thee but not for me" attitude towards the ICC and similar institutions. I think it would take the US losing a war on the level of Germany in World War II for a senior American official to face an international tribunal.
Yeah, hardly anybody gets punished for war crimes, or crimes against humanity.
If anything ever happens to those currently serving in Trump's administration, it's got to happen in some future times, to charges brought by the US Justice Dept. I hope someday it happens, but I'm not so hopeful.
Like even his kids. Say what you want about Biden's son, but these guys are profiting quite handsomely from their Dad's administration. Will they ever get charged with corruption? We can only hope.
I think we are making a lot of unwarranted assumptions about the future. In 2014, no one would have thought that America would be doing the things it has been doing in 2025. Trump has unmoored traditional assumptions and restraints and that can lead into many different directions. The US extraditing its own war criminals to get around a dubious pardon is within the Overton Window at this point, is as a full descent into fascism and many other possible outcomes.
Brutal crime against humanity. We have done far more destruction to Cuba's people than every excess of their governments going back to independence.
Just depressing.
Hegseth already has a long charge sheet and he's barely served a year.
His fingerprints are all over the Iranian school bombing which appears to be at least gross negligence or reckless indifference, given the full circumstances that are known and his own statements about eschewing "stupid rules of engagement" for maximum lethality.
There were also the murders of the individuals on boats in the Caribbean, which appear to have been directed under his orders and authorization. Deliberate violations of both domestic and international law resulting in the deaths of multiple people.
In the broader context of his openly expressed contempt of international law or indeed any legal or moral restraint on violence committed under the purported color of American military action, I believe a strong case could be made already and he is still busy adding to the outrages.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on Today at 01:30:05 PMThe US extraditing its own war criminals to get around a dubious pardon is within the Overton Window at this point, is as a full descent into fascism and many other possible outcomes.
I think it's in the Overton Window, but only because I think a major international or civil war is within it as well. I think one of those is necessary for extradition to happen. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think the signs are encouraging.
Quote from: Valmy on Today at 01:35:04 PMBrutal crime against humanity. We have done far more destruction to Cuba's people than every excess of their governments going back to independence.
Just depressing.
It is, depressing and unnecessary. However, tying back into my other point, this was also the long-time argument against the crippling sanctions imposed on Iraq between 1991 and 2003.
This is another reason I don't think any extradition request would be fulfilled without some sort of serious external impetus: too many still don't see actions like cutting of Cuba from oil as a crime (even if they disagree with it as a measure). We've had decades of other people protesting all the "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" the US as allegedly committed. Our governments have punished (or attempted to punish) those that we agree are actually crimes, but there are many where our governments, and a significant number of our people, don't think the alleged actions constitute crimes. That's why there has been universal disdain for the idea of the ICC making judgement on Americans. Perhaps the Trump regime will drive a change whereby we start doing it for the clear cases where we agree with the ICC, but as I mentioned above I'm not encouraged.