>learn in school and history books that Hitler refused to use chemical weapons during the war because he experienced the brutality of those weapons first hand during WWI.
>Trump administration mentions this
>leftists suddenly claim that Hitler used chemical weapons because he used a chemical to kill Jews.
Are these the alternate facts that they were talking about? So basically whenever Trump or his administration says something, they will try to twist the facts to make it appear as a bad thing?
Source?
>they will try to twist the facts to make it appear as a bad thing?
Of course. They don't give a fuck, they just want to do everything in their power to destroy Trump and his associates. Anything he says will be warped into some sort of racist remark so they can be outraged on Twitter.
Nigga, it's all over the news.
Everyone is claiming that Germany used chemical weapons during WWII because of what Spicer said.
>learn in school and history books
as it turns out, history is more complex than what you learn in the 8th grade.
No, I meant source on Hitler refusing to use chemical weapons
Show me examples of chemical weapons used during WWII by Germany.
Using the holocaust as proof is not an argument.
They are only making a fuss because soon THE HOLOCAUST won't be the power card it is now, especially after all the survivors have died.
Germany didn't use chemical weapons in battle, so who cares what some shitty MSM headline says lmao it will be out of the news cycle in 3 days
It's all about optics.
You can't just talk about Hitler in any context where it seems like you're excusing him because there are ten thousand cameras on him, and the attention span of the media demographic is only long enough for sharp sound bites.
Even though spencer was literally correct, he's still a fucking moron
Just a further disconnect between them and us. Lines are being drawn.
Also that nig in the foreground has the worse weapon designed by man.
>The Nazis did use chemical weapons in combat on several occasions along the Black Sea, notably in Sevastopol, where they used toxic smoke to force Russian resistance fighters out of caverns below the city, in violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol.
>The Nazis also used asphyxiating gas in the catacombs of Odessa in November 1941, following their capture of the city, and in late May 1942 during the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula in eastern Crimea.
>tfw the last (((holocaust))) survivors will die in your lifetime.
>Chemical Forces General Ochsner reported to German command in June 1942 that a chemical unit had taken part in the battle. After the battle in mid-May 1942, roughly 3,000 Red Army soldiers and Soviet civilians not evacuated by sea were besieged in a series of caves and tunnels in the nearby Adzhimuskai quarry. After holding out for approximately three months, "poison gas was released into the tunnels, killing all but a few score of the Soviet defenders." Thousands of those killed around Adzhimushk were documented to have been killed by asphyxiation from gas.
inb4 slavs are subhuman so the treaty does not apply to them
Simple google search. Still don't know why people circlejerk over something that shouldn't come of as a surprise (US WH spokespersons are notoriously retarded) Rather than the fact that there is still no evidence to whether it was Ashar Al Bassad or durkas, or even a durka stockpile being hit.
the shoah's never truly ovah
>he used chemicals to kill jews
no he did not
>>tfw the last (((holocaust))) survivors will die in your lifetime.
you are one silly person, user. Holocaust survivors are still being born today
Not if we gas you goys first
You can genetically inherit the shoah
Our grandkids will still pay reparations when they are 80
>(((holocaust))) survivors
how can you survive something that never happened?
I looked into this after seeing the media brouhaha about this and the sources for those claims are fairly dubious coming directly from the Soviet government and not repeated in western sources with no mention of what the gas actually was. While it would have been in violation of the treaty using tear gas to flush holdouts out of tunnels is a far cry from using sarin to kill them.
it's not even a joke, just google 'third generation holocaust survivor' or whatever
Everything is dubious, but then again, if the sources are dubious just because it's a soviet source, what makes the official government stance on the Syrian gas attack any more credible? It's not, US is notorious with false flagging and staging things up only to get a pretense to join. Also, what was written in the so-called proof published in MSM was just very vague "could have" "videos prove" "white helmets" and so so.
Why not allow for the international investigation then? As far as I know, last time the chemical attack in Syria happened it was ruled out that Assad did not do it. Why would he do it now? When he is winning the war. If anything, I am pretty sure more Chemical Attacks will follow in the near future, if this vague bullshit sparked the tomahawks, imagine some larger scale attack.
Also, Agent Orange, heavily used, long lasting effects for generations to come, distributed exclusively by Uncle Sam. Should've talked about this instead rather than Nazi Germany. But I guess it's not a Chemical WMD per-se because it was used as a defoliant...
It's common knowledge for non-germans.
Hitler re-instated the flame thrower even though it's was banned after WW1. Why do you even care? There are no rules in war. What good does rules do you in a fight when 10 muslims are kicking you in the teeth while you're lying unconscious on the street?
1) Germany had chemical weapons
2) Germany did not use chemical weapons
That means reich commandment refused to use chemical weapons.
I think the US is a dubious source on the Syrian gas attacks. Personally I think it's intentional misinformation designed to push the American public into war much like the WMD claims of Iraq II, the babies being thrown out of incubators claim of the Gulf War, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, and probably complicity in allowing Pearl Harbor to be attacked.
>Also, Agent Orange, heavily used, long lasting effects for generations to come, distributed exclusively by Uncle Sam. Should've talked about this instead rather than Nazi Germany. But I guess it's not a Chemical WMD per-se because it was used as a defoliant...
Agent Orange was likely just genuine indifference to potential health effects rather than a plan to fuck the Vietnamese over many years in the future when cancer and birth defect rates spiked. If the US government wanted to use genuine chemical weapons in Vietnam they would have.
The genuine indifference does not make it any less of a fuck up and setting a precedent along with making USA look like hypocrites, then again, when they weren't acting like ones. And somehow I doubt, that during the development of this agent, they didn't notice the potential immediate risks during use just for the means of deforestation. After all, if you're developing something like this I am pretty sure you should have roughly a good idea of what it can do to humans in case they are exposed to it.
However, it's nice to get someone willing to discuss it further and not either jumping to memes or not responding to anything that might not suit the narrative at all.
Open a book fer fucks sake
Fuck this shit
Cite a source that says he did.
I'm not denying they weren't at a minimum willfully negligent when it came to using Agent Orange and even in some hypothetical where it didn't have any effect on humans and worked as intended I would still say it shouldn't have been used because completely destroying the natural environment of a country beyond repair to gain an advantage in war is at best ethically questionable.
I don't have any illusions about my government. It's no secret that it's 30% pure evil, 30% greed, 30% incompetence, and a remaining 10% that can't currently be accounted for but they can assure us does exist and will hopefully be found in the next audit.
>but the SPLC and my history teachers told me hitler was 10000000% evil and would stop at nothing
yeah i bet he didn't use gas/chemical weapons on a large scale bc of ww1 and also that the allies would just do the same, turning germany into a dead zone from both european fronts
it's dumb
Huh? You realize my country used them in WW2, Korea and Vietnam right? There's nothing illegal about them. Also did you even read the OP?
Indeed, and what's even more terrifying that this did not trigger any legal international action simply because it was used solely as a means of deforestation in order to dispose of the natural cover for the guerrilla combatants rather than a chemical agent designed to harm human lives. This was also "secretly" being used as a means to destroy the crops, and accepting starvation as a legitimate war tactic, which resulted in a lot of shit happening in Vietnam all at once.
My only problem with that is, that everything sets a precedent. And all it does is make USA seem more and more despicable by the day. Like I Said earlier, you can only be doing this only for so long. Most of the world hates your country for different but legitimate reasons already but it will eventually get to a point, where I would be afraid to even rely on the allies.
To me it more likely seems, that for example given the chance, even the Europe would take a shot at USA any given day. That's how much of a fuck up the foreign relations are. And if history taught us anything, it's that empires fall and centers of power shift. I would be surprised if somewhere in the future, where there will be exposed some weakness in the USA that the world would not hop on a chance to completely fuck it up for all they did. It's like a freaking ticking time bomb and US is not only indifferent about it, but they even taunt everyone like it's still 1991 and it's uni-polar world.
how are you supposed to aim that gun? shoot it sideways? wtf
He didn't use Sarin against his enemies. It's believed to be because he was temporarily blinded by mustard gas in the first world war. He describes the agony in Mein Kampf
I don't think the US will fall to outside pressure but I wouldn't be surprised if the US either balkanized in my lifetime or just fell into Brazil tier disarray, possibly both. The whole house of cards is clearly unsustainable in both the foreign and domestic spheres and eventually people here are going to get tired of propping it up and getting nothing for their efforts. Unless things get unexpectedly better here or unexpectedly worse everywhere else it's probably inevitable. You occasionally catch a hint from the elite that we're on this course when they use phrases like "managed decline" when talking about the US' future and then go and buy property in New Zealand.
Sarin is a chemical weapon
zyklon is an insecticide not a weapon
I've been puzzled about this as well, my first thought was that it got sights on the side like for example Bren LMG, but then again, why the hell do they got bipod 90 degrees sideways. The only explanation is that they are really shooting this thing sideways.
muzzies dont aim, the bullets will find their mark if allah wills it
Yes if Trump admin supports something the left will hate it. Logic be damned
On the other hand, this could be really fired like Bren LMG and the bipod being on a hinge that can be tightened and un-tightened to move it under the barrel.
>slavs are subhuman so the treaty does not apply to them
>inb4
Shit Czech thought ahead
i remember hearing it in a documentary about how poor little Hitler was so sad and injured about chemical weapons being use he swore never to witness it again
he did permit the use of chemicals on humans though, delousing agents to prevent to spread of typhus in the camps.
>Spicer apologizes
are you trying to claim Trump's administration cucked under pressure? Why would Trump hire such weak people to represent him?
I don't think he wants to end up the next david irving
>prevent to spread of Typhus
That did not work at all....
Yeah, balkanization to me also seems probably like a most likely outcome, you've already got some secession movements in the US that can only get more and more vocal as the time goes and the domestic and international politics follow the same track. And when I said about that exposed weakness I meant, that they will use any means possible to fuck it up further. So if the balkanization becomes as possible, everyone who holds a grudge against US (almost everybody) will spill some more fuel into the rising fire one way or another, either financial and international support or weapons not available to civies (Launchers, Manpads etc, like Taliban insurgents or any other freedom fighting organization around the world really) and instructors when things get really heated. Because again, you already have a precedents of mostly US backed NGOs that destabilize situations in countries around the globe under the guise of keeping democracy and protecting citizens from oppressive government then following it up with arming various rebel groups. And the most ironic and probable outcome would be, that this thing will happen in the US by the exactly same guidelines.
To prevent, I never said it worked effectively
That isn't much different from using a flamethrower on a tunnel.
a cuck is a cuck. he should have hid his power level
Well, Spicer apologized, like they all do. Until people stop apologizing for things they say that are true, nothing will change.
It's just the cowardice of the modern white Christian heterosexual male.
>implying the survivors can die if it's made up
>So if the balkanization becomes as possible, everyone who holds a grudge against US (almost everybody) will spill some more fuel into the rising fire one way or another, either financial and international support or weapons not available to civies (Launchers, Manpads etc, like Taliban insurgents or any other freedom fighting organization around the world really) and instructors when things get really heated.
While this is a real possibility if the US does break up I personally don't think it'll be a particularly violent affair. Maybe the first one or two regions to decide to go it alone will see some action but after that I think a lot of people will be for just opting to do their own thing as well and it'll be more of a drift than a break. It's not like it would be a good thing if there was actual prolonged conflict between any hypothetical regions, we'd still have a high degree of economic interdependence and probably some mutual defense once things have settled down. I suspect we'd end up with something closer to how the country was initial envisioned for at least a little while before the cycle starts all over. It's either that or we all go down together in the race to the bottom.
It's possibility as well. On the other hand, now that I am thinking about it, the nuclear weapons displaced around whole USA could also throw a potential wildcard in the outcome. I remember that after the fall of CCCP, the Ukraine was disarmed but in the US it could turn out completely different. I remember some red plan guy, that was either LARPing or being genuine outlined some valid points about the possible outcome of the secession or even a civil war. Not sure I can find the image but it went mostly by the lines that if things were violent and military was to be used in order to suppress the uprising. It could turn into a huge clusterfuck really quickly where even the military would split in two, one supporting gov and one the anti-gov. I'll try to find it.
It was far easier than I thought. 1/?
Former red team planner for the government here. If there was a revolution in the US, the rest of the world would get involved, fast. Depending on the type of uprising, there is a large chance that it would not be a quick affair. It would be brutal, it would be bloody, and the US government could start a global scale war. Here are the top ten issues that came up.
1) The US power grid can be taken down by a series of “surgical strikes” with the exception of the Texas grid. By surgical strikes, I mean a few marksmen (US army-tier Marksmen–the minimum requirement) hitting certain spots on the grid would fuck a lot of the military and government because they need the grid more than Bubba and his friends do. Additionally, while all government agencies have backup generators, they will be hard pressed dealing with the resultant looting and other madness that would come with power outages. This would effectively create another front for the military. It would also turn the people against the government more quickly and paralyze the government’s propaganda machine. Worse still–the key points of the US power grid are publicly obtainable information, and not only are the points too many to be effectively guarded, they are not guarded anyway.
You really think it will end with the 6 gorillion?
They will just change the definition again. children of survivors are damaged becouse theyr parents had ptsd from holocaust.
2) The estimated desertion rate in case of a civil war is 75% in the case of a left-wing president. 50% of that would be assumed to immediately betray the president. The remaining (treasonous) military would be fighting its own. Yet another front created in the war. Additionally, there is an assumed 25-50% desertion or outright betrayal rate in three letter government agencies (FBI, CIA, NSA, ATC, TSA, etc.). Additionally, it is assumed that 5% of the initial 50% betrayers would stay in their job and become saboteurs. 10% of that 50% would contain key information that would be of critical danger to the US government. Of that 10%, 1% would be able to deliver that information to the US’ foreign enemies. What you should get from this is that the second the United States government declares war on its own is the second it ceases to exist as the state we know it.
3) “Tea baggers,” “right-wing extremists,” and “oath keepers” which are considered untrained racists who aren’t “good with a gun” often are A) veterans who now have more time to have fun at the range, sometimes more than some Army units or Marine units. In addition to previous military training, B) often camp and do other outdoor activities–more than many in the military do, as the focus has gone away from field exercises, and C) often have better equipment–outside of armor and heavy weapons–than the military. However, C) is kind of irrelevant because many of the places in which these people could hide would make the kind of war the US fights with the equipment they use pointless.
4) Outside influence is a huge problem. Russia has already stated they would back a Texas separatist movement, and right now we already have enough problem keeping Islam in check. The second the US has to fight in a “civil war” is the second it becomes a proxy war between NATO and whoever wants to mess with America. While America has amazing nuclear and air defense, if it comes to a civil war you have to assume that in a best cast scenario the US military is going to be operating at 50% capacity at best. Shit would go down. Hard. And fast. And if Russia–spoiler alert: one of the best militaries in the world at fighting in an urban environment–sent trainers and helpers to rebels, you can reliably bet that they would also possibly deliver weapons to them. So instead of fighting “Timmy TeaBagger,” you are fighting “Timmy TeaBagger who is buddies with Vlad.”
5) A civil war is not just the US versus the rebels. There will be looting. There will be rioting. Cities will burn. The National Guard cannot fight both the rebels and rioters in a city that would also cut off their supplies. Additionally, if you don’t think that the rebels will send in instigators into the cities–or worse, stand alone actors (A Lone Wolf on steroids. Think Timothy McVeigh, but instead of one van they have a whole fleet of them. A good movie example would be Bane)–you would be mistaken. If the US government cannot even help its own people, why would its own people support the remaining (treasonous) military? Worse yet, if someone emptied out prisons (There are more prisoners in the US than there are people in the entire Chinese Army), you would have more crime than the police could ever handle.
6) Logistics and infrastructure in the US are crumbling and failing. Any war fought against a rebellion in the US would be a logistical nightmare, even before the rebels started going full Al-Qaida and putting IEDs in the road. A retired general who was contracting with us on the team said, “The only thing holding together the US’ infrastructure is duct tape and the will of the Department of Transportation. And often enough, there isn't enough duct tape.” Your most loyal cities to the US government, as we polled, are also the most logistically easy to cut off. NYC? San Fran? L.A.? D.C.? Baltimore? Most of them require crossing water to enter, from certain directions. Most of them have critical airports. Some of them have critical ocean ports. If anything happened to just TWO of the cities on the list, it would create a logistical clusterfuck.
7) Your “Johnny Reb” and “Timmy TeaBagger” states (i.e., “red” states) all have something most of your “oh so progressive,” “Aren’t we so European,” “Oh my god, we are just like Sweden,” blue states don’t. Blues are mainly consumer states. Reds are producer states. Urban areas don’t have farms. The second that shit goes down, realize a lot of those blue areas are likely to starve. In a civil war scenario, we predicted that at least 10,000 people would die of starvation if the war was not finished in a year. The numbers get worse after that. Or better, rather, for the country after the war.
shoving your fingers in your ears and saying the same thing over and over again is as bad as it gets when it comes to a political discussion
as for the gas. who cares.
8) The US has way too many choke points, and the government forces would often be on the wrong side of them. This ties into the logistical nightmare, but it also has to do with an odd phenomena. Liberals like to live near the ocean. Many of the dividers of the country, like the Rocky Mountains, the Mississippi River, Appalachia, the Missouri River (fun fact: the biggest choke point for the US government is in Missouri) are red state areas. Sure, air travel is a thing, but a majority of the US government's needs would have to travel by ground. Even still, many of the major airports are outside of the city. Of course, the US would use military base air fields, but if civil war did break out… which bases would be safe? Which ones would have fallen to the deserters?
9) PR Nightmare. Every rebel killed on CNN would be spun as “the US government killed X Civilians today in a strike” on foreign news and pirate media not owned by the government. That is–as pointed out earlier–if the US media could even function in a civil war or uprising. Your “rebel scum” know that the main thing that holds together the US–nay life in the US as we know it–is the 24 hour news cycle and the media. The second it's gone, you are going to have urban anarchy. If you are from America, can you imagine a day without TV, newspaper, or Internet? Your average urban youth can’t. If you don’t think that isn’t going to cause rioting, you must have a real high regard for how much restraint they have. Assume in a civil war that your ability to talk to the people is compromised. Also assume that in the case of a civil war that rebels may know how to monitor conversations like the US does, as there are manuals online on how to do so.
10) This one is either 1 or 10, depending on who is asked. The US will never nuke its own. The second it does, they have lost the civil war and other countries will come to “liberate” the US from its own “repressive regime.” Additionally, if any general, minuteman, nuke tech, or nuke sub captain decided to side with the rebellion, the US government is immediately SOL.
In short: The second that a “civilian uprising” or “extremist group terrorist attack” turns into “civil war” is the second the US loses. As a result, you will never see a civil war. You will see Waco, you will see Bundy Ranch, you will see all sorts of militant group confrontations and maybe even some skirmishes. But the US government fears its own people way the fuck too much to ever start a civil war.
As an American, I want all other Americans here to remember this. The government is against you, almost openly now, but they also know that they cannot win if it comes to open war. We have a trump card they cannot match. If it comes to a fight, THEY WILL LOSE, so there are elements in the establishment who will do absolutely everything in their power to prevent it from coming to that. The US Government is not in support of its people, and the people are not in support of the government.
It is within the means of certain interests to start World War III simply as a distraction to avoid an American Civil War, because, by their reckoning, it is better to ruin other “lesser” nations like Syria and spill the blood of patriots than lose their own grip on power.
(This was post was posted on Sup Forums about two years ago and now in a hindsight, the Syrian and Korean situation seems to be very very real)
Zyklon B wasn't a chemical weapon. It was an insecticide it was never used beside it's intended purpose.
nice camo retards
I'm not really sure what would happen with the nukes in this scenario. They could be divided up, all get moved to the largest successor state, end up under joint control between all the states or something to that effect.
While this guy points out a lot of real issues that could arise I've always suspected it was a LARP by someone that had a cursory knowledge of the subject and a talent for writing stories. It does a little too much dick sucking of the kind of people that frequent /k/ where it was originally posted to make me think it's legit and not designed to get them to repost it a million times because it plays into their fantasies of how things would go down and how guys like them would come out on top. If it was a couple notches down on the Red Dawn/Turner Diaries dial I'd be more inclined to believe it.
...
Yeah, that's why I am conflicted about this whole thing. While he really brings some valid points, it still seems like too much of a LARP power fantasy and stroking just the right kind of dick appealing to the /k/ dream of innawoods... I just pretty much paraphrased your point with different wording.
On the other hand, what narrative today isn't appealing to some kind of power fantasy of some marginal group. It's like today there isn't any unified front to propel humanity forward together. Everyone makes their own, short sighted powerplays that plays in their own hands without thinking about the future few years down the road. And I don't know, whether the people are unwilling to accept it or just unable to asses it. In no way I am proclaiming, that you can predict the outcome of any decision whatsoever but there got to be some "possible outcomes of this step"
This is one of the reasons why I don't believe in some world domination conspiracy, to me seems more likely that this is some sort of King of the Hill setting where there are hundreds of groups fighting each other for various means of domination, some for financial, some for social and so on.
Agent Orange was contaminated with a small amount of a really nasty dioxin. Everything I''ve read suggested that the actual herbicides were not the problem.
>leftists suddenly claim that Hitler used chemical weapons because he used a chemical to kill
but they forget to mention that the jews funded Hitler....
Maybe, I have just broad grasp of this whole thing, which is apparently still far deeper than most Sup Forums. What puzzles me more however is this double interpretation of the international law and how wording can change the outcome of legit atrocities about which I've written here in the first third of a post
A browse though wikipedia notes that agent Orange resulted in UN Resolution 31/72 and the Environmental Modification Convention.
Your 'starvation' tactic was to force the farmers to move to the cities and not have crops growing that would support the enemy.
I find all that enormously different than compounds that indiscriminately kill or maim everyone that comes in contact with it: soldiers and non-combatants. I can't get that worked up over a herbicide. Even using it as 'starvation' is little different than destroying the necessary infrastructure for a soldier to fight like a weapons plant or ball bearing plants (WWII). The fact that it had dioxin in it sucks.
If you don't want people dying, don't go to war.
>This is one of the reasons why I don't believe in some world domination conspiracy, to me seems more likely that this is some sort of King of the Hill setting where there are hundreds of groups fighting each other for various means of domination, some for financial, some for social and so on.
I'd agree with that assessment. It's just the unfortunate result of human nature being what it is.
Post theme: youtube.com
But where did we go so wrong? Funny thing, whatever things we circlejerk about on Sup Forums in the end for me, it will always boil down to "Where did we as a humanity failed". When looking for music on the YT I've stumbled upon this song (the post theme) and It had the same effect on me like on the most people in the comments, like this kind of "the future that never was" feel, which probably was due to the accompanying visuals. So I've decided to look into it more and somehow I've got even more sad.
While in no way I am defending the Soviet Union or whatever, there was this one thing they got extremely right. This behavioral conditioning/programing (Behavioral Psychology and Philosophy) where they tried to nurture the dreamers in the kids (the ethics of it is questionable) there are tons of these animations for kids about space travel, the bright and just future and shit and some even with a deeper underlying philosophical meaning. Like this one for example, memes aside it's worth a watch youtube.com
So like I said earlier, I still don't get where we as a humanity have failed, because those exact kids from USSR have turned into alcoholics and just in general into trash. And I wonder why, did not this approach work? Or was it the too much of a difference with the possible future and the available means, or was it the ultimate destruction of one generation. Again, we are looking at it from the scientific point of view and this case is extremely unique.
And with all of this, when compared even with the shows I grew up on (which were mostly shit) not to mention this complete degeneracy Pregnant Elsa and Spiderman vids on YT makes me weep for the future even more. Today, I don't see anything that could unify us as a humanity for greater cause.
May lack some substantial structure, was sort of rush typed but hope this sets a topic for discussion.
here is the real red pill
spicer got that information from my posts on Sup Forums
look up zyklon b real chemical name (cyanide hydroxide) and look up how it was used in war
france and the united states used it
germany did not
lurk more, spicer is a pollack
even bigger red pill, he was naming the jew on purpose using his position to force trump to balance out the jewish influence of his kids and the neocons mcmaster
if trump loses any more of his administration, he is toast like nixon
Nail on the head. It doesn't matter what they say they warp and twist it
>Source
Lmao this is Sup Forums.
>But where did we go so wrong?
I think it's always been like this we just see more and more of it as our lives allow for more leisure time and access to information. If you're a peasant farmer in medieval Europe the schemes and machinations of the aristocracy are entirely unknown to you until a guy shows up at your door and tells you that you need to get your shit together for war. Now we see all the scheming that's always been happening so it's a matter of how aware of it we are and less that there was a major change in how humans act.
One thing I'm always reminded of when the topic of "where did we as humans make a change" comes up is a the discussion of a particular piece of Roman graffiti in Pompeii. The graffiti was prices for services by a male prostitute who was named and advertised him as being great at sucking cock. There was some contention among scholars over if this graffiti represented a genuine advertisement for a prostitute or if it was someone taking the piss out of someone else by essentially writing "for a good time call 555-COCK and ask for *name*" on a bathroom stall door with opinions leaning towards the later as homosexual prostitution was heavily frowned upon. I mentioned this because I think it's a great example of the fact that humans have been going pretty much exactly what we do for a very long time and it's pretty unlikely to change anytime soon.
Also the short you posted is one of my favorites.
Do they not teach you about World War 2 in Germany?
DANKE MERKEL
There's a leftist politician from the labour party called Ken Livingstone here in the UK thats been demonised for making facts about Hitler and the NSDAP.
He said Hitler was a zionist in the 1930's that supported the return of Jews to Palestine.
This is an historical fact known as the Haavaara Agreement. Jews were to be deported to British Palestine and their belongings would follow behind.
About 68,000 did go between 1933-1940(On top of the 280k that fled Germany) where they proceeded to begin a resistance war against the British army but that's a different story. The agreement was cancelled at the onset of the war brought on by the (((allied))) nations in early 1940.
This
I'm just sitting here, waiting for them to change the wikipedia article on WW1 chemical weapons to fit their alternative facts
He buried chemical weapons so they wouldn't use it. Do you Germans even know anything other than MUH HOLOCAUST about Hitler & WW2?
>He used chemicals to kill people sure but the chemicals werent weaponized
That changes everything
Damn, that graffiti things puts a lot of things in perspective on one hand, but on the other it just means, that we did not really go that far in general. I do feel in particular that society around us evolves much faster than the humans living in it. That's why some things, which could be meant as a genuine goodwill will in the end be turned in a complete opposite and as a means to oppress.
"...onset of war brought on by the (((allied))) nations in early 1940." Um, German INVADED Poland, an ally of Great Britain. By their nationally recognized treaty and defensive alliance Great Britain and France were obligated to declare war on Germany for it's actions. The United States, opting to stay out of "another European War" was then attacked by Germany's ally in 1941. After which The US finally declared war on Japan, with Germany as Japan's ally declaring war on the US shortly after.
If I put you in the garage with the car engine running it's a little bit different to putting poison gas on the end of a V2 and launching it at London
>Use gas in the deep and long catacombs to kill any rats hiding inside or to force them out.
Why is that bad? Modern militaries do this today.
Stop being a moral crybaby. When you see your mates being blown apart by weaponry, you will want to see the same happen to the enemy. You try thinking back to WW2 and the destructive urban combat. Would you want to enter dark and long unmapped tunnels in a place where hundreds of thousands of skeletons have lay for centuries whilst knowing there are resistance fighters hiding in there?
No thanks. Gas the fuckers and block as many entrances as possible. Job done.
Plus regarding the sources of those stories. It's the (((Soviet))) sources. The same regime that killed tens of millions of its own people and had false flag squads dressed in german uniforms to commit atrocities called "Torch Men". There's a street called Khreshchatyk in Kiev,Ukraine that retreating Soviet soldiers under orders from the NKVD torch men rigged with hidden explosives to await the German army despite knowing there were Russian civilians living there. When the German army secured the long street and were registering the civilians, the Soviets set the bombs off over 400km away from the site. The entire street exploded. over 300 buildings were flattened and German and Russian civilian losses numbered in the thousands dead and tens of thousands wounded as explosions spread through the gas pipelines. It was blamed on the Germans for propaganda purposes to rally the soviet civilians against the "fascist invaders". It was the first operation in history to use long distance radio explosives.
Remember the Katyn forest massacre? Up until the 1990's history believed the German army was responsible. Turned out it was the Soviet NKVD death squads dressed in German uniforms that killed the 25,000 Polish prisoners.
Russia only just acknowledged it as a crime committed by the Soviets in 2010.
Communists...but yeah...commies aren't human so it don't count
That was only used on clothes and dead bodies m8
did agent orange really not affect people hit with it at all?
>Nevertheless, the Nazis did not extensively use chemical weapons in combat, at least not against the Western Allies, despite maintaining an active chemical weapons program in which the Nazis used concentration camp prisoners as forced labor to secretly manufacture tabun, a nerve gas, and experimented upon concentration camp victims to test the effects of the gas. Otto Ambros of IG Farben was a chief chemical-weapons expert for the Nazis.
>The Nazis' decision to avoid the use of chemical weapons on the battlefield has been variously attributed to a lack of technical ability in the German chemical weapons program and fears that the Allies would retaliate with their own chemical weapons. It also has been speculated to have arisen from the personal experiences of Adolf Hitler as a soldier in the Kaiser's army during World War I, where he was gassed by British troops in 1918. After the Battle of Stalingrad, Joseph Goebbels, Robert Ley, and Martin Bormann urged Hitler to approve the use of tabun and other chemical weapons to slow the Soviet advance. At a May 1943 meeting in the Wolf's Lair, however, Hitler was told by Ambros that Germany had 45,000 tons of chemical gas stockpiled, but that the Allies likely had far more. Hitler responded by suddenly leaving the room and ordering production of tabun and sarin to be doubled, but "fearing some rogue officer would use them and spark Allied retaliation, he ordered that no chemical weapons be transported to the Russian front." After the Allied invasion of Italy, the Germans rapidly moved to remove or destroy both German and Italian chemical-weapon stockpiles, "for the same reason that Hitler had ordered them pulled from the Russian front—they feared that local commanders would use them and trigger Allied chemical retaliation."
Wew lad
The greatest technological advances in the 20th century were the result of incredible human innovation caused by the anxieties of total waron a global scale. Now, in times of peace, we have planned obsolescence. We're wired to advance through destruction on large scales, until we evolve out of this. Styxxhexenhammer talks about a current behavioral sync happening right now, and I want to believe it's something to do with a new development in our evolution, but it could also just be the strong sense of tribalism everyone is feeling.
So did US and British occupying forces on all German civilians when the war ended. They publically threw delousing powders over German civilians at checkpoints during the great migration as tens of millions of people were moving across Europe trying to return home.
German PoW camps led to the death of over 1mn soldiers in the west after the war due to poor conditions and rampant disease and upwards of 3mn in Russia though the number there can never be confirmed due to the Russians silence on the matter of death marches off German soldiers and gulags of hard manual labor and execution.
I wouldn't be here if my German grandfather died in his Allied PoW camp before being released and settling in England in 1951.
Female "Collaborators"(women that danced,sang,drank and fucked with German soldiers and officers) in the allied areas of Europe were humiliated with shaved heads and branded swastikas,publically raped and beheaded or hanged by the occupied populaces who wanted nothing but revenge. These people committing the crimes were protected by the allies to "get it out of their system".
Many German women in soviet controlled areas were forced to get with high ranking soviet commanders to avoid gangrapes by the Asiatic hordes of conscripts. Its the reason there are so many attractive Russian women today due to the influx of central and northern european genetics thanks to mass rapes and breeding.
Jewish (((survivors))) were allowed under US watch to chop up German guards with knives and axes. Their bodies thrown onto the piles of corpses packed into train cars infected with typhus and due to be burnt to slow down the spread.
I am not a moral crybaby. I have no illusion of the modern warfare, what I am saying is that it sets another international precedent that anyone can act on a whim based on a suspicion and sidestepping UN.
About mates being blown apart, that's debatable. If your grandparent was a German officer, then yes you can apply that. However, if someones else grandparent was officer in a Red Army, then he would hate them for what they did and he would also like to blow or gas the Nazis.
Also, you are stepping in your own shit. If the using of chemical warfare is acceptable, then you need to stop being a moral crybaby about some blown up street, it's a warfare after all and puts both things on equal footing. And it's delightful how easily it's Ukraine, when the street is blown by (((Soviets))), but it immediately changes to Russians when it's the Katyn massacre, as far as I know, they were mostly Ukrainians. And how much it was a False Flag or NKVD it's debatable either, don't forget Stepan Bandera and the pro-nazi activity. Sources regarding the history are contradictory and you can hardly make ANY claim and saying, that it's 100% truth. Also, any sane civilian in a conflict would leave when the invading army is about to capture your city. Using this logic, anyone who willingly stays in ISIS occupied area is a civilian that dindu nuffin yet we both know they are not and silent approval is still approval.
What you are doing is just pointing a finger, accusing others like a moron. At this point, it's like cheating on a test yet telling to the teacher that somebody else is cheating and he should be punished. This whole discussion wasn't whether it was horrifying or not but about international law. And regarding the warfare, no matter how you try to wrap it to suit your narrative, there is no real winners nor saints nor devils.
And if you are able to give benefit of the doubt to Soviet sources, then you should do the same for this Gas Attack, after all the Iraq Invasion because of WMD has been proved to be a complete clusterfuck shitstorm. And last thing, the numbers about millions of dead are overblown. All propaganda statistics aside, it simply does not add to the population size.
Why are jews so butthurt about WW2? they gassed the crap out of them, big deal, jeez deal with it already.
>Not trusting the führer
Are you a traitor????
1. "did not use gas in combat"
vs
2. "did not use gas"
#1 is true and #2 is false. (historical consensus)
Spicer said or wanted to say #1.
Leftist tactical deaf miss-understanders claim #2 and laugh like the dumb idiots that they are.
