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@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Yes
@B2D7YQ5 3mos3MO
Most states have committed human rights violations at some point so it could be used to prevent military arms to countries fighting for democracy which could have devastating humanitarian consiquiences. And also it specifically says “accused of human rights violations” and not “proved to have committed human rights violations”
@9QYDNKN9mos9MO
No, this turns accusations into a weapon that bad actors will use to impact our allies' ability to defend themselves.
@B3VMKY61mo1MO
Yes, but only if they are an enemy or threat to Australia or our allies.
Yes, but subject such countries to a review before proceeding with a ban.
@9ZSZJSXIndependent5mos5MO
No, just because a country is accused does not mean that this is true
@9ZR2LN55mos5MO
Only give weapons to our fellow European and Commonwealth realm nations as well as monarchist militias in other countries
@9ZM933G5mos5MO
Why are you selling weapons to other countries while you remove the right of your own peoples protection from guns? Seriously, it took a kindergarten kids brain a simple explanation of this to say "Thats stupid!"
Surely if someone that age can see common sense someone in government should. You're all dirty power hungry, greedy war mongers. Get out of parliament.
No, 'accusations' regardless of their factual content can then be used as a weapon to isolate us and our allies.
@B333L682mos2MO
It depends as the ICC has falsely accused Israel of human rights violations while completely disregarding H*mas and H*zbollah.
Yes, but review it on a case by case basis, this could possibly prevent allies from defending themselves.
@B2SXP9S3mos3MO
No, this should be reviewed on a case by case basis, not a wholesale ban.
@9PRB8KZ10mos10MO
We should only sell arms to allies, and it should be minimum period
@B2CRG6DOne Nation3mos3MO
No. The UN and ICC are politically and ideologically biased. We should withdraw funding of both and make up our own mind on who to sell arms to but ban arms sales to all Muslim countries for human rights violations to women and children.
@B3BKXMY 2mos2MO
Yes, and harshly, scaling to severity of the human rights violations
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
