@ISIDEWITHQuestionsForeign policyStarted 1yr agoActive 7 days ago

Should there be restrictions on government arms sales to countries accused of committing human rights violations?

The United Nations defines human rights violations as deprivation of life; torture, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; slavery and forced labor; arbitrary arrest or detention; arbitrary interference with privacy; war propaganda; discrimination; and advocacy of racial or religious hatred. In 1997 the U.S. Congress passed the “Leahy Laws” which cutoff security aid to specific units of foreign militaries if the Pentagon and the State Department determine a country has committed a gross violation of human rights, such as shooting civilians or summarily executing prison…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings x  Anti-Capitalism

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 176 Anti-Capitalism voters.

92%
Yes
8%
No
78%
Yes
5%
No
10%
Yes, and ban all sales to countries with human rights violations
3%
No, this could prevent our allies from defending themselves against our mutual enemies
3%
Yes, but I would prefer a ban on all military aid to any foreign countries

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 176 Anti-Capitalism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 176 Anti-Capitalism voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Anti-Capitalism voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9MLFTSW from Tennessee  answered…10mos10MO

Country should be vetted to make sure the weapons are not used against American interests or being funneled to adversaries.

 @9J954YK from Tennessee  answered…1yr1Y

If a country is even suspected of human rights violations, the government should freeze any arms deal with that country until that rumor is either confirmed or denied.

 @9ZCM2FJ from Guam  answered…4mos4MO

no if it serves Washington's (or her allies) interests, just like the case in Israel which is accused of commiting genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza when it is a mere military action in reality.

 @B393CC2 from New York  answered…7 days7D

Saudi Arabian arms sales should be more regulated, and stop trafficking arms through third party arms dealers.

 @B32TNKZ from Utah  answered…2wks2W

The USA should limit business interactions with any country which has constitutional values which directly clash with its own.

 @B2DBM3Y from Illinois  answered…2mos2MO

No, this could cause international tensions, but I think the government should make regulations and maybe threaten parting ways if the country continues being immoral

 @9J9256Wanswered…1yr1Y

Every situation should be dealt with case by case, this issue cannot be answered properly without understanding circumstance

 @7PTCG38  from Wisconsin  answered…1yr1Y

Yes, cutoff security aid and arms sales to offending countries until those responsible for gross violations of human rights are brought to justice

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

Active 4 days ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Trump's Deportation Storm: America Braces for Mass Exodus of Immigrants

For months, immigration advocates have been planning for the possibility of Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Now, their worst fears have arrived.Immigrants’ rights groups have spent the last year preparing for a second Trump term and an overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, analyzing Trump’s proposals, drafting legal briefs, coordinating messaging and organizing aid for immigrants and asylum seekers. They responded to Trump’s victory with alarm and vowed to put up a fight, setting the stage for four more years of contentious court battles with his administration.Some are already preparing to push current leadership at the Department of Homeland Security to take steps to stymie the incoming Trump team, particularly on immigrant detention and the use of AI in enforcement.“We should expect to see the devastation of immigrant communities all over the country. We should expect to see family separation,” said Kica Matos, the president of the National Immigration Law Center. “It is entirely possible that he will try to use the military to carry out deportations, so that means that Americans all over the country will see the military engaging in enforcement against civilian populations, which is horrifying.”Trump, after winning a historic victory on a platform of turbo-charged immigration enforcement, has said he will conduct mass deportations at a scale never before seen. Immigrant advocates have warned this would be expensive and inhumane, separating families and wrecking communities. The president-elect has also vowed to build huge detention camps, hire thousands more border agents, funnel military spending toward border security and invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expel suspected members of drug cartels and criminal gangs without court hearings.He has also said he would end “catch-and-release” — allowing migrants to remain free, often with monitoring, while they await immigration court hearings — and restore a policy from his first term requiring asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while their cases are processed. And he has dodged questions about whether he would try to bring back family separation.

▲  4333 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

Bernie Sanders Charges Ahead As Democrats Stall Out

Bernie Sanders launched a tour in red states like Iowa and Nebraska to rally opposition to Donald Trump’s agenda, drawing massive crowds—thousands in Omaha and overflow audiences in Iowa City.Unlike the Democratic Party’s muted response to Trump’s election, Sanders is actively challenging the administration’s plutocratic policies, focusing on billionaire influence and federal deregulation.In Iowa City, Sanders spoke to packed venues, delivering back-to-back speeches to accommodate attendees, a first in his political career, highlighting his enduring appeal.He criticized Trump’s inner circle, including billionaires Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg, who attended the inauguration, and warned of their control over federal agencies.Sanders galvanized the crowd with historical references—suffrage, slavery, independence—urging grassroots action to counter Trump’s planned $1 trillion tax cuts for the rich and cuts to programs like Medicaid.Attendees expressed frustration with Democratic leaders like Hakeem Jeffries, calling their opposition to Trump weak or nonexistent, while praising Sanders for providing direction.Sanders highlighted the slim Republican House majority (three seats), suggesting constituent pressure could sway vulnerable GOP members to block Trump’s reconciliation bill.Early signs show GOP walkbacks—like Trump’s false claim Medicaid won’t be cut—after outrage over federal grant pauses disrupted services, proving grassroots impact.The crowd, mostly liberal, cheered Sanders’ defense of reproductive rights and jeered Trump’s USAID cuts and Zelensky attacks, though some noted a shift in his base—younger Trump supporters absent.Sanders ended with Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, framing the fight as a timeless struggle against billionaire rule, inspiring attendees like Audrey to re-engage and Erin to find hope in solidarity.

▲  1917 replies