They unironically think dispersing a crowd of wimps with tear gas is the same thing as burning the skin off of babies with mustard gas, or annihilating entire villages in minutes with sarin.
I genuinely hope these people experience a gas attack irl and see what it's actually like.
They're confusing it with the intent of the laws, imo. The US gasses her own troops to prepare them for chemical weapon attacks. The biggest reason chemical weapons in any form are banned is because imagine if you tear gas some soldiers, they think it's relatively safe, and then you hit them with Sarin or mustard gas.
Bonus content in the entire linked post:
"When is something a war if its within the nation itself? can assad just keep gassing rebels as long as he calls it riots without being charged for warcrimes? sounds like a massive loophole."
I find it rather unsettling that cops are allowed to do things to civilians that would be considered war crimes if done against enemy soldiers.
Right but that's not because the gas in itself is particularly deadly or because it can be compared to actual fucking chemical weapons.
It's because the gas disables combatants and makes them vulnerable to being picked off easily. If this shit was allowed in war any kind of conflict large or small would just be the two sides bombarding each other with clouds of tear gas to make it easy to just shoot the other guys.
Tear gas is okay for crowd control because it disables people and allows them to be arrested (not killed). The difference is in how the people disabled by the tear gas are treated, in war you can use it to disable people as long as you only arrest them and not head shot them from point blank.
27 comments
1 AutoModerator 2020-07-23
do not comment or vote in linked threads
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
82 alakavat 2020-07-23
They unironically think dispersing a crowd of wimps with tear gas is the same thing as burning the skin off of babies with mustard gas, or annihilating entire villages in minutes with sarin.
I genuinely hope these people experience a gas attack irl and see what it's actually like.
20 HodorLePortePorte 2020-07-23
Are they confusing it with white phosphorus?
33 TheRootinTootinPutin 2020-07-23
They're confusing it with the intent of the laws, imo. The US gasses her own troops to prepare them for chemical weapon attacks. The biggest reason chemical weapons in any form are banned is because imagine if you tear gas some soldiers, they think it's relatively safe, and then you hit them with Sarin or mustard gas.
9 morroia 2020-07-23
t. Shoko Asahara's ghost
35 lavermad 2020-07-23
Bonus content in the entire linked post: "When is something a war if its within the nation itself? can assad just keep gassing rebels as long as he calls it riots without being charged for warcrimes? sounds like a massive loophole."
48 CeetheAndSope 2020-07-23
Yes.
28 employee10038080 2020-07-23
I wish the lion of Damascus would save us from these Portland rebels
15 WallyWendels 2020-07-23
What do these people think is happening to Assad
13 Godsdj 2020-07-23
Comparing tear gas to military-used gases and the lives they take, smh
21 Iowa_Hawkeye 2020-07-23
14 WeWuzKANG5 2020-07-23
Reddit in a nutshell.
5 Protista_of_Peace 2020-07-23
At least they admitted it instead of just doubling down.
2 WeWuzKANG5 2020-07-23
Sure, me personally, I go back and check all comments I upvote to be sure no one pulled a trickster on me with an editeroony.
4 USS_Lyndon_Johnson 2020-07-23
Right but that's not because the gas in itself is particularly deadly or because it can be compared to actual fucking chemical weapons.
It's because the gas disables combatants and makes them vulnerable to being picked off easily. If this shit was allowed in war any kind of conflict large or small would just be the two sides bombarding each other with clouds of tear gas to make it easy to just shoot the other guys.
Tear gas is okay for crowd control because it disables people and allows them to be arrested (not killed). The difference is in how the people disabled by the tear gas are treated, in war you can use it to disable people as long as you only arrest them and not head shot them from point blank.