Uncredible U.N. |

Uncredible U.N.

Only the United Nations would accept Cuba’s claim that the U.S. trade embargo is akin to “genocide.” In a near-unanimous vote, Turtle Bay, for the 19th consecutive year, urged the U.S. to end its sanctions of Fidel Castro’s communist paradise.

In a report submitted to the General Assembly by none other than U.N. boss Ban Ki-moon, Cuba argued that the embargo, dating to 1962, somehow fits the international law description of genocide. Only Israel stood with the U.S. in voting against the nonbinding resolution.

It speaks volumes to the U.N.’s lack of credibility.

Last year alone the U.S. sold Cuba $533 million in agricultural products, medical equipment and other goods. It has expanded the amounts of humanitarian aid that Americans donate directly. And the U.S. has lifted restrictions on family visits.

But while the Obama administration offers sugarplums of diplomacy, Cuba reciprocates by stomping on them. (To wit, Club Castro has jailed an American subcontractor on trumped-up spying charges.)

Of course Cuba’s exaggerated claim is nothing new. Neither is the fact that it passes muster in a world body that turns a blind eye to bona fide genocide.

The absurdity is compounded by America’s willingness to pay for this rather than invest in a new world forum of mutually minded nations.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.