|
Post by Vegas on Apr 12, 2017 17:08:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Apr 12, 2017 17:12:18 GMT
I saw that yesterday.
I think I knew Nazis used gas chambers to exterminate Jews when I was 13 years old.
How did that guy get his job?
I realize he's just trying to gain support for more military action by painting his 'enemy' as 'worse than Hitler'. It's too bad the transparent nature of his comments will be missed by the majority.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 17:34:35 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292877/Did-Nazi-scientist-save-Britain-Hitlers-deadly-gas-killed-millions.htmlIt may have been used on a small scale in combat, and Hitler allegedly considered using it on a large scale in a last-ditch effort to halt the Allies' drive on Berlin. This is about the Syrian children, isn't it? You know, children die all over the world every day. We can't even protect the children in our own country. Does Trump care about them? Does Cinemachinery care about them? And if they were shot or blown up or burned up, would it have the same propaganda value that chemical weapons would have.....assuming for the moment that Assad or any of his generals ordered a chemical strike, which is not proven.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 12, 2017 17:47:11 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292877/Did-Nazi-scientist-save-Britain-Hitlers-deadly-gas-killed-millions.htmlIt may have been used on a small scale in combat, and Hitler allegedly considered using it on a large scale in a last-ditch effort to halt the Allies' drive on Berlin. This is about the Syrian children, isn't it? You know, children die all over the world every day. We can't even protect the children in our own country. Does Trump care about them? Does Cinemachinery care about them? And if they were shot or blown up or burned up, would it have the same propaganda value that chemical weapons would have.....assuming for the moment that Assad or any of his generals ordered a chemical strike, which is not proven. Hitler used it on a grand scale to kill people in gas chambers ErJen. You did know that right, or are you now a Holocaust denier as well?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:02:43 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292877/Did-Nazi-scientist-save-Britain-Hitlers-deadly-gas-killed-millions.htmlIt may have been used on a small scale in combat, and Hitler allegedly considered using it on a large scale in a last-ditch effort to halt the Allies' drive on Berlin. This is about the Syrian children, isn't it? You know, children die all over the world every day. We can't even protect the children in our own country. Does Trump care about them? Does Cinemachinery care about them? And if they were shot or blown up or burned up, would it have the same propaganda value that chemical weapons would have.....assuming for the moment that Assad or any of his generals ordered a chemical strike, which is not proven. Hitler used it on a grand scale to kill people in gas chambers ErJen. You did know that right, or are you now a Holocaust denier as well? You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," troll. I talked with a man who spent some time at Buchenwald. Regarding gas chambers, depends on who you talk to. Some say the Zyclon B was used for killing lice, but it's still a poison, and a large-enough dose is lethal to a human, of course. You might want to educate yourself on the phrase, "in combat" someday. Or should I have put it in bold to ensure that you noticed it? And lastly, I did not come here for a repetition of what happened on the old board. You can either stop it, or you will be stopped. Your choice.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 12, 2017 18:04:00 GMT
Hitler used it on a grand scale to kill people in gas chambers ErJen. You did know that right, or are you now a Holocaust denier as well? You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," troll. I talked with a man who spent some time at Buchenwald. Regarding gas chambers, depends on who you talk to. Some say the Zyclon B was used for killing lice, but it's still a poison, and a large-enough does is lethal to a human, of course. You might want to educate yourself on the phrase, "in combat" someday. Or should I have put it in bold to ensure that you noticed it? And lastly, I did not come here for a repetition of what happened on the old board. You can either stop it, or you will be stopped. Your choice. Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:09:19 GMT
You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," troll. I talked with a man who spent some time at Buchenwald. Regarding gas chambers, depends on who you talk to. Some say the Zyclon B was used for killing lice, but it's still a poison, and a large-enough does is lethal to a human, of course. You might want to educate yourself on the phrase, "in combat" someday. Or should I have put it in bold to ensure that you noticed it? And lastly, I did not come here for a repetition of what happened on the old board. You can either stop it, or you will be stopped. Your choice. Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Apr 12, 2017 18:09:42 GMT
Using chemical weapons in combat is horrific. But it's ok to use on a civilian population.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Apr 12, 2017 18:11:05 GMT
Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone. So how again does this make Assad worse than Hitler?
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 12, 2017 18:14:07 GMT
Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone. What are you talking about? Chemical weapons are chemical weapons, no-one was talking about "battlefield weapons" when the Tokyo subway system was hit by a sarin attack. If Hitler had dropped Zyklon B on Allied troops he'd have been just as guilty of using chemical weapons as he is already.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:15:04 GMT
Using chemical weapons in combat is horrific. But it's ok to use on a civilian population. As I understand it, they are illegal for use in war, but it is not illegal for a country to use them against its own population. This post is not a defense of chemical weapons. I did not write the laws on such matters.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 12, 2017 18:15:51 GMT
Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone. Damn, you're an imbecile.
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on Apr 12, 2017 18:16:57 GMT
Using chemical weapons in combat is horrific. But it's ok to use on a civilian population. As I understand it, they are illegal for use in war, but it is not illegal for a country to use them against its own population. This post is not a defense of chemical weapons. I did not write the laws on such matters. So long as the Holocaust was only directed against German Jews, it wouldn't be illegal?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:18:46 GMT
Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone. What are you talking about? Chemical weapons are chemical weapons, no-one was talking about "battlefield weapons" when the Tokyo subway system was hit by a sarin attack. If Hitler had dropped Zyklon B on Allied troops he'd have been just as guilty of using chemical weapons as he is already. Then I ask you: What makes killing by chemical weapons any more objectionable than killing by bombs, or bullets, or rockets, or artillery shells, or landmines, or napalm? Civilians have been killed by all of those things as well, all over the world, for many years.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Apr 12, 2017 18:22:43 GMT
You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," troll. I talked with a man who spent some time at Buchenwald. Regarding gas chambers, depends on who you talk to. Some say the Zyclon B was used for killing lice, but it's still a poison, and a large-enough does is lethal to a human, of course. You might want to educate yourself on the phrase, "in combat" someday. Or should I have put it in bold to ensure that you noticed it? And lastly, I did not come here for a repetition of what happened on the old board. You can either stop it, or you will be stopped. Your choice. Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. To be fair I disagree with that, aside from a couple of unproven claims, the Nazis never used chemical weapons. There is a distinction between using chemical weapons and using a chemical to aid you in carrying out genocide. Just to be clear on two points: Spicer is a clown and should never have said that, it is a stupid stance and a stupid comparison, a similar comparison would be Hitler and Ghandi because they were both vegetarian. Even if he did not use chemical weapons and may have personally been against them, Hitler was still an unmitigated asshat. (i just wanted to clarify those points in case people tried to put words in my mouth)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2017 18:23:31 GMT
Hitler used it on a grand scale to kill people in gas chambers ErJen. You did know that right, or are you now a Holocaust denier as well? You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," You sure about that? There are youtube videos denying the holocaust, you know. Not like you to go against your Ultimate Authority.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:23:36 GMT
As I understand it, they are illegal for use in war, but it is not illegal for a country to use them against its own population. This post is not a defense of chemical weapons. I did not write the laws on such matters. So long as the Holocaust was only directed against German Jews, it wouldn't be illegal? I don't know, but I do know that German Jews were not by any means the only German victims of the Holocaust. And you know that too.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 12, 2017 18:24:19 GMT
You can drop that right now. You already know that I am not a "Holocaust denier," You sure about that? There are youtube videos denying the holocaust, you know. Not like you to go against your Ultimate Authority. You can knock it off too.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 12, 2017 18:24:36 GMT
So long as the Holocaust was only directed against German Jews, it wouldn't be illegal? I don't know, but I do know that German Jews were not by any means the only German victims of the Holocaust. And you know that too. Put the goalposts back where you found them, you ridiculous simpleton.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Apr 12, 2017 18:25:01 GMT
Why does "in combat" matter? Hitler used chemical weapons very liberally. Because any such weapons employed in Syria recently would be categorized as battlefield weapons and not murder weapons. Zyclon B was a commercial insecticide, and as I have already said in large-enough doses it would be lethal to anyone. I am a little bit concerned at your phrasing here with the could have been used and would have been lethal. Is there something stopping you from outright saying Hitler ordered that 12 million people be put to death in gas chambers and that this was carried out by the SS?
|
|