Spicer Says Hitler Didn't "Use Chemical Weapons"

[Correll]

Here's yet another example of how rightarded Correll is.... Here are several of his posts where he employed the word, "weapon"...

And Bill is an excellent weapon to do so with.

Her strongest weapon would have been the Woman Card.

The Political Correctness is hypersensitivity used as a weapon to destroy, bully, intimidate, suppress and marginalize the enemies of the Left.

[emphasis added]​

according to this raging imbecile...

Bill Clinton is a "weapon"....

Play the "woman card" is a "weapon"...

And even political correctness is a "weapon"...

But posionous gas used to kill millions of people is not a "weapon"

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

 

[Timmy]

Weapon.




View attachment 121630 Not weapon.


Liberals are lying pieces of shit.

As if the forum needed more evidence that you struggle with the English language.

weapon

something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy​

Both images you posted were used as weapons.

Words have meaning, even if you don't understand them.

So, would you call THIS a weapon?

Or an execution device?


Dumb ass lib.

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Were those kids in Syria soldiers in battle ? How are they any different than the Jewish kids gassed to death by Hitler ! ?

I can't believe this is a debate !!!

 

[SYTFE]

Here's yet another example of how rightarded Correll is.... Here are several of his posts where he employed the word, "weapon"...

And Bill is an excellent weapon to do so with.

Her strongest weapon would have been the Woman Card.

The Political Correctness is hypersensitivity used as a weapon to destroy, bully, intimidate, suppress and marginalize the enemies of the Left.

[emphasis added]​

according to this raging imbecile...

Bill Clinton is a "weapon"....

Play the "woman card" is a "weapon"...

And even political correctness is a "weapon"...

But posionous gas used to kill millions of people is not a "weapon"

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

I know you weren't talking to me, but I figured I'd chime in to say that I definitely consider Matthews an imbecile.

 

[Correll]

As if the forum needed more evidence that you struggle with the English language.

weapon

something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy​

Both images you posted were used as weapons.

Words have meaning, even if you don't understand them.

So, would you call THIS a weapon?

Or an execution device?


Dumb ass lib.

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Were those kids in Syria soldiers in battle ? How are they any different than the Jewish kids gassed to death by Hitler ! ?

I can't believe this is a debate !!!

Stop your lying. No one is that ignorant of Western Culture.

 

[Faun]

Here's yet another example of how rightarded Correll is.... Here are several of his posts where he employed the word, "weapon"...

And Bill is an excellent weapon to do so with.

Her strongest weapon would have been the Woman Card.

The Political Correctness is hypersensitivity used as a weapon to destroy, bully, intimidate, suppress and marginalize the enemies of the Left.

[emphasis added]​

according to this raging imbecile...

Bill Clinton is a "weapon"....

Play the "woman card" is a "weapon"...

And even political correctness is a "weapon"...

But posionous gas used to kill millions of people is not a "weapon"

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

 

[Correll]

Here's yet another example of how rightarded Correll is.... Here are several of his posts where he employed the word, "weapon"...

And Bill is an excellent weapon to do so with.

Her strongest weapon would have been the Woman Card.

The Political Correctness is hypersensitivity used as a weapon to destroy, bully, intimidate, suppress and marginalize the enemies of the Left.

[emphasis added]​

according to this raging imbecile...

Bill Clinton is a "weapon"....

Play the "woman card" is a "weapon"...

And even political correctness is a "weapon"...

But posionous gas used to kill millions of people is not a "weapon"

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

 

[Timmy]

Weapon.




View attachment 121630 Not weapon.


Liberals are lying pieces of shit.

As if the forum needed more evidence that you struggle with the English language.

weapon

something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy​

Both images you posted were used as weapons.

Words have meaning, even if you don't understand them.

So, would you call THIS a weapon?

Or an execution device?


Dumb ass lib.

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Word !

Example . If you beat someone with a baseball bat , you'd be charged with using a deadly weapon .

Apparently, out righty pals would argue "that's not a deadly weapon , it's just sporting equipment!"

 

[Correll]

As if the forum needed more evidence that you struggle with the English language.

weapon

something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy​

Both images you posted were used as weapons.

Words have meaning, even if you don't understand them.

So, would you call THIS a weapon?

Or an execution device?


Dumb ass lib.

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Word !

Example . If you beat someone with a baseball bat , you'd be charged with using a deadly weapon .

Apparently, out righty pals would argue "that's not a deadly weapon , it's just sporting equipment!"

Why are you lying about what we are saying? Oh, because you know that the truth doesn't work for you.

 

[Timmy]

So, would you call THIS a weapon?

Or an execution device?


Dumb ass lib.

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Word !

Example . If you beat someone with a baseball bat , you'd be charged with using a deadly weapon .

Apparently, out righty pals would argue "that's not a deadly weapon , it's just sporting equipment!"

Why are you lying about what we are saying? Oh, because you know that the truth doesn't work for you.

Please enlighten me on what the truth is?

 

[Faun]

Here's yet another example of how rightarded Correll is.... Here are several of his posts where he employed the word, "weapon"...

[emphasis added]​

according to this raging imbecile...

Bill Clinton is a "weapon"....

Play the "woman card" is a "weapon"...

And even political correctness is a "weapon"...

But posionous gas used to kill millions of people is not a "weapon"

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

 

[Correll]

Either could apply, depending on context. If it's not used, it's neither, it's just an ugly chair. Of course, according to your idiocy, if I were to strap you into one of those and flipped the switch, according to you, I would have killed you without a weapon.

Again, words have meaning, even though they're well beyond your limited comprehension.

Hit a nail with a hammer and it's a tool.

Hit someone over the head with that same hammer and it's a weapon.

Savvy?

Kill someone with an execution device and you've executed them, you didn't kill them in battle.

Iron is a chemical. DOes that make this a chemical weapon?

So what if it's used in battle or not? Use it to kill someone and it's still a weapon.

You really should learn English if you're going to post here.

Oh, and if one were to hit someone over the head with that chunk of iron, then yes, it's a weapon.

This really isn't that difficult. If you weren't a sniveling conservative, you'd get it.

Word !

Example . If you beat someone with a baseball bat , you'd be charged with using a deadly weapon .

Apparently, out righty pals would argue "that's not a deadly weapon , it's just sporting equipment!"

Why are you lying about what we are saying? Oh, because you know that the truth doesn't work for you.

Please enlighten me on what the truth is?

IN this context, that a execution device is not a weapon.

 

[Correll]

And if some lefty had said that Bill Clinton was NOT a weapon, I would have NOT had a hissy fit about word usage.

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

What you refer to as a "hissy fit" is, in reality, "education."

You're just too oblivious to know it.

You're welcome.

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

 

[Correll]

Someone posted a vid of Chris Matthew stating the HItler didn't use chemical weapons. Do you consider him a "imbecile" or is that different because he is a good lefty?

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.


Fuck you.

 

[easyt65]

Spicer's comments just show he is a Chris Matthews fan:


Flashback – MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: ‘Hitler Didn’t Use Chemical Weapons’ (VIDEO)


2013:
"Chris Matthews: “If you basically put down a red line and say don’t use chemical weapons, and it’s been enforced in the Western community, around the world–international community for decades. Don’t use chemical weapons. We didn’t use them in World War II, Hitler didn’t use them, we don’t use chemical weapons, that’s no deal.”

 

[Faun]

Of course he's an imbecile like you. You had to ask?

Do you think there's anyone here who doesn't know a political hack like you would be calling Hitler's use of zyklon B, a "chemical weapon," had Obama's press secretary said exactly what Spicer said?

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.

Who cares what you were taught? Words have meaning. It was used as a "weapon." You've been shown the definition which applies to it. No one cares that you're too ignorant to learn.

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is usually included among the CW agents causing general poisoning. There is no confirmed information on this substance being used in chemical warfare. However, it has been reported that hydrogen cyanide was used by Iraq in the war against Iran and against the Kurds in northern Iraq during the 1980's. Hydrogen cyanide has high toxicity and in sufficient concentrations it rapidly leads to death. During the Second World War, a form of hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) was used in the Nazi gas chambers.

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
​

Fuck you.

Sorry, but you're a three-time loser.... (1) I'm married; (2) I'm not gay; (3) even if I were single and gay, I don't fuck losers like you.

 

[Correll]

It is you political hacks who are conflating execution devices to be chemical weapons so that you have a thin rationalization for ginning up some more "outrage", and the resultant personal attacks and smears.

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.

Who cares what you were taught. Words have meaning. It was used as a "weapon." You've been shown the definition which applies to it. No one cares that you're too ignorant to learn.

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is usually included among the CW agents causing general poisoning. There is no confirmed information on this substance being used in chemical warfare. However, it has been reported that hydrogen cyanide was used by Iraq in the war against Iran and against the Kurds in northern Iraq during the 1980's. Hydrogen cyanide has high toxicity and in sufficient concentrations it rapidly leads to death. During the Second World War, a form of hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) was used in the Nazi gas chambers.

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
​

Fuck you.

Sorry, but you're a three-time loser.... (1) I'm married; (2) I'm not gay; (3) even if I were single and gay, I don't fuck losers like you.

Note your own excerpt.

It states categorically that hydrogen cyanide was used in Nazis Gas chambers AND that there is "no confirmed information of this substance being used in chemical warfare".




My FUCK YOU stands, asshole.

 

[Faun]

"execution device."

Sure, dumbfuck.... this isn't a "weapon" in that man's hand... it's an "execution device."

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.

Who cares what you were taught. Words have meaning. It was used as a "weapon." You've been shown the definition which applies to it. No one cares that you're too ignorant to learn.

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is usually included among the CW agents causing general poisoning. There is no confirmed information on this substance being used in chemical warfare. However, it has been reported that hydrogen cyanide was used by Iraq in the war against Iran and against the Kurds in northern Iraq during the 1980's. Hydrogen cyanide has high toxicity and in sufficient concentrations it rapidly leads to death. During the Second World War, a form of hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) was used in the Nazi gas chambers.

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
​

Fuck you.

Sorry, but you're a three-time loser.... (1) I'm married; (2) I'm not gay; (3) even if I were single and gay, I don't fuck losers like you.

Note your own excerpt.

It states categorically that hydrogen cyanide was used in Nazis Gas chambers AND that there is "no confirmed information of this substance being used in chemical warfare".




My FUCK YOU stands, asshole.

Nah, now you're fucking yourself.

I never said it was used in warfare. The poor souls rounded up and sent to concentration camps were not engaged in war with the Nazi's. You even pointed out earlier Hitler did not use it in battle and I did not contest that.

Your point is DOA.

Don't you ever tire of losing?

 

[Correll]

I'm glad you are enjoying your humor.

The point stands. Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.

Hence the Allies did not use chemical weapons in retaliation.

Assad DID use chemical weapons.


THis bullshit of you lefties is just another way you guys are assholes.

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.

Who cares what you were taught. Words have meaning. It was used as a "weapon." You've been shown the definition which applies to it. No one cares that you're too ignorant to learn.

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is usually included among the CW agents causing general poisoning. There is no confirmed information on this substance being used in chemical warfare. However, it has been reported that hydrogen cyanide was used by Iraq in the war against Iran and against the Kurds in northern Iraq during the 1980's. Hydrogen cyanide has high toxicity and in sufficient concentrations it rapidly leads to death. During the Second World War, a form of hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) was used in the Nazi gas chambers.

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
​

Fuck you.

Sorry, but you're a three-time loser.... (1) I'm married; (2) I'm not gay; (3) even if I were single and gay, I don't fuck losers like you.

Note your own excerpt.

It states categorically that hydrogen cyanide was used in Nazis Gas chambers AND that there is "no confirmed information of this substance being used in chemical warfare".




My FUCK YOU stands, asshole.

Nah, now you're fucking yourself.

I never said it was used in warfare. The poor souls rounded up and sent to concentration camps were not engaged in war with the Nazi's. You even pointed out earlier Hitler did not use it in battle and I did not contest that.

Your point is DOA.

Don't you ever tire of losing?

So, you don't consider the Holocaust to be part of WWII? You're drawing very, very fine distinctions in order to justify being an asshole.

Why not just NOT be an asshole? Or is that out of the question for you?

 

[Faun]

I am enjoying the humor -- but most of it stems from your idiocies.

Your point is retarded. That's your point. Again, by the definition of the word weapon, Hitler's use of zyklon B establishes it as a weapon. Because it's a chemical, it was employed as a chemical weapon.

Again, the hammer analogy, which aptly applies -- use a hammer on a nail, it's a tool. Use it to kill someone, it's a weapon.

This couldn't be simpler. You're just too rightarded to get it. It's ok, you're a conservative. No one really expects you to get it.

For generations after WWII, history classes were taught that Hitler did not use chemical weapons in WWII.


That's the way I learned it.

To pretend that there is no difference between a device used to kill people locked in an airtight room and a weapon used in a military operation is blatant dishonesty on the part of the Left, and you are doing so in order to be dicks.

Who cares what you were taught. Words have meaning. It was used as a "weapon." You've been shown the definition which applies to it. No one cares that you're too ignorant to learn.

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide is usually included among the CW agents causing general poisoning. There is no confirmed information on this substance being used in chemical warfare. However, it has been reported that hydrogen cyanide was used by Iraq in the war against Iran and against the Kurds in northern Iraq during the 1980's. Hydrogen cyanide has high toxicity and in sufficient concentrations it rapidly leads to death. During the Second World War, a form of hydrogen cyanide (Zyklon B) was used in the Nazi gas chambers.

Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
​

Fuck you.

Sorry, but you're a three-time loser.... (1) I'm married; (2) I'm not gay; (3) even if I were single and gay, I don't fuck losers like you.

Note your own excerpt.

It states categorically that hydrogen cyanide was used in Nazis Gas chambers AND that there is "no confirmed information of this substance being used in chemical warfare".




My FUCK YOU stands, asshole.

Nah, now you're fucking yourself.

I never said it was used in warfare. The poor souls rounded up and sent to concentration camps were not engaged in war with the Nazi's. You even pointed out earlier Hitler did not use it in battle and I did not contest that.

Your point is DOA.

Don't you ever tire of losing?

So, you don't consider the Holocaust to be part of WWII? You're drawing very, very fine distinctions in order to justify being an asshole.

Why not just NOT be an asshole? Or is that out of the question for you?

Holyfuckingshit!

You're simply too rightarded to converse with. That's another point you make. The Holocaust was a non-combatant aspect of the war. The Nazi's used people they rounded up as slave labor to help their war effort and killed many of the people who couldn't, or wouldn't, help to that end. So yes, it was part of the war.

Regardless of your infinite ignorance, I gave you leading source on chemical weapons who state that it is indeed a chemical weapon. Hysterically, your "hallelujah" response was to point out it wasn't used in combat, which no one is claiming it was.