To any sensible person, US sanctions against Cuba have been a waste of time. After 50 years, the only effect has been to prop up the Cuban regime. All the arguments against normalization of relations are couched in small-minded dichotomous terms. Essentially, Cuba is bad and needs to be punished. I can’t think of a better example of DT supplanting problem-solving then the argument that maintaining the sanctions will somehow bring about change in Cuba. Today the president has handed DT a crushing defeat. He has not just taken a step that will benefit the people of both the US and Cuba, he has taken a step that will significantly promote long-term human evolution.
One argument against the U.S. engaging in torture is that it degrades our “moral authority.” Unfortunately the concept of “moral authority” is quite dichotomous. To many in this world the U.S. has no right to claim moral authority, with or without torture (or drone strikes). It is unfortunate this is the framework of the discussion. The real issue should be human evolution/development. If we do not progress as a species, we run the risk of extinction, either through our own direct actions or through inadvertent ecological collapse.
The best argument against torture is that it does not move us forward as a species. It represents a backward step in our evolution/development. Instead of trying to be a “moral leader” the U.S. should strive to be the leader in promoting human evolution/development. What makes the system in the U.S. great is the degree to which it promotes life and dignity. The argument should be from a more objective scientific/humanistic standpoint rather than from the more subjective moral standpoint. This would avoid the dichotomous noise that comes from the arguments about whether the U.S. deserves to be regarded as a “moral leader.”