Should The United States condition our trade policies based on the country's human rights record of other countries? Rating Options

[BamBamBoogie]

This is also a topic my team will be debating soon. I think that this is a really good one.

[brooklyneast05]

Now it may not be best to completely ignore the human rights of other countries, but a refusal of trade or even embargos only cause more harm to the citizens who are being victimized in the first place.

don't you think it could just as easily be fueling the fire. it's not like going ahead and trading with them is giving them any incentive to change their policy.


edit:

We're basically saying that "if you don't do things the way we like it, we won't be your friend."

we shouldn't want to be friends with places who don't honor basic human rights. i think that's what michael was saying too.

[BamBamBoogie]

don't you think it could just as easily be fueling the fire. it's not like going ahead and trading with them is giving them any incentive to change their policy.

But ignoring the issue wouldn't sole anything either. We're basically turning our backs. We should handle the situation, but an embargo isn't the right way to go.

edit:

we shouldn't want to be friends with places who don't honor basic human rights. i think that's what michael was saying too.

Well how do we know exactly what human rights should be granted? Other countries see America as having human rights issues because we don't provide healthcare to every citizen. Not to mention our previous issues of slavery, discrimination, and many other blemishes on our morality slate.

Now I do understand your point, But if we stop trade, the agricultural workers of another country may be affected far more than the government. That agricultural worker may be depending on the profits of the import/exports with america. We are basically harming them more.

For example: The Cuban Embargo. The Castro family is still in power, and the Cuban people are still suffering.