using chemicals to kill people

[woolfe9998]

I voted yes, in war the winners write the rules. doesnt even have to be "war" if your family is being attacked/targeted by a hostile group you will do what it takes to protect them, if it involves mixing some chemicals together to make poisonous gas to take out an entire group that is going after my family, yes, yes i will do that. Do i feel the Nazi's were justified? hell no. Do i think Saddam Hussein was justified? hell no. a yes and no vote isnt black and white. I feel there times i would feel justified using chemical weapons against people/group (large or small group), there are times it has been done and i feel it was not justified. But when it comes down to my family being attacked, nothing is off limits to stop those who are attacking my family.

I don't think the OP was thinking about self-defense scenarios. It's OK though, because the entire premise of the poll is stupid anyway.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Wow, only on Anandtech can someone with a straight face say they'd use chemical weapons for self defense. Ignoring how monumentally stupid that would be as any chemical used in such capacity has a very high likelihood of killing yourself and people you're "defending" as well, it also completely ignores what is actually being discussed.

Then again, its a thread by someone who supports the group most likely to be Holocaust deniers and that openly calls for murdering people they simply disagree with, whilst they act like its "kids today" that are the problem.

 

[HomerJS]

Republicans have already encouraged the elderly to sacrifice their lives to Covid for the sake of the economy.

Wonder what cocktail they are recommending?

 

[Leeea]

Yes.

I am pro-death penalty. Chemicals are the best way.

The way the death penalty is implemented in the USA is deeply flawed and racist. Executions should be paused until after reforms are put in place.

However, some people just have it coming.

 

[pete6032]

Ambiguous question. If 5 people invaded my home I would have no qualms about throwing bleach at them. Should chemical weapons be used in military operations? No.

 

[BoomerD]

I'm also pro-death penalty and think it should be used more.

However...are we counting nuclear radiation as "chemical?"
(Today being the 77th anniversary of dropping the Hiroshima bomb)

 

[Captante]

I'm also pro-death penalty and think it should be used more.

However...are we counting nuclear radiation as "chemical?"
(Today being the 77th anniversary of dropping the Hiroshima bomb)

Gunpowder in a bullet is "chemical" too if we stretch far enough....

 

[DaaQ]

didnt say it was, but you called it the capitalist freedom river, when communists do more. I was simply pointing out that although American businesses do pollute waterways, communist china does it alot more, you are the one who only narrowed it to the capitalists.

Isn't the majority of communist China doing so for American Capitalistic businesses?

Ambiguous question. If 5 people invaded my home I would have no qualms about throwing bleach at them. Should chemical weapons be used in military operations? No.

Add ammonia to that and you have yourself a cocktail. Just saying. Keep your family away from it.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I have no problems with capital punishment recipients and assisted suicide being put down with chemicals. Other than that I see no use for chemicals ending a human life.

Lethal injection is inhumane as fuck, if I was on death row I'd do anything I could to get a bullet to the heart or head instead.

 

[Drach]

Lethal injection is inhumane as fuck, if I was on death row I'd do anything I could to get a bullet to the heart or head instead.

I disagree but every state has their own methods.
Making one suffer is doing it wrong.

 

[sdifox]

Communist China pollutes it's waters and air way more than capitalistic America does.

You have very rosy glasses on.

 

[pmv]

I don't know that the abhorrence towards chemical weapons (as used by the likes of Saddam) is directly due to the Holocaust. The Holocaust wasn't exclusively carried out with poison gas, they also shot large numbers of people. Early on they gassed people using Carbon Monoxide from vehicle exhausts. The distinguishing feature was the industrial scale of it and that the targets were defenseless civilians. The distaste for chemical weapons surely predates the Holocaust?

Not really sure why the OP asks such a peculiar question - wondering if it's a setup for some weak argument about abortion by chemical means? Why would they expect anyone to answer 'yes' to such a question?

Far as lining people up and shooting them no doubt.... if you count people "worked" to death it's a different story and much closer.

OTOH if you count the great Chinese famine CAUSED by Mao's policies then he's the "champion" of death and it's not close.

It was more like the "Great leap backwards".

If you count the famines caused by Mao (which probably one should), you should also count the multiple Bengal famines caused by British capitalism - first repeatedly under the East India Company, then much later under Churchill. The former explicitly decided that famine relief was not allowed because it violated the 'free market', preferring to let people starve.

The latter, at 3 million dead in the 1943 famine, would put Churchill up there with Mao and Stalin, if that's the calculus.

And just wait till we start totting up the deaths due to climate change. Future generations will probably assign the responsibility for that to all of us.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I disagree but every state has their own methods.
Making one suffer is doing it wrong.

Making them suffer is the point of lethal injection. It's not crucifixion, but it's pretty sadistic to paralyze someone and have him just wait for the drugs to kill him with full awareness of what's happening, especially times when they don't kill quickly. Too much shit can and does "go wrong" with it all time. Just shoot them in the heart or guillotine them so it's over quickly.

 

[Leeea]

Making them suffer is the point of lethal injection. It's not crucifixion, but it's pretty sadistic to paralyze someone and have him just wait for the drugs to kill him with full awareness of what's happening, especially times when they don't kill quickly. Too much shit can and does "go wrong" with it all time. Just shoot them in the heart or guillotine them so it's over quickly.

I have long thought the use of chemical explosive placed against the head would be superior. Just turn it all into vapor, no pain, no realization, just gone.

The current system is quite cruel, and reforms are absolutely necessary.

 

[amenx]

Gunpowder in a bullet is "chemical" too if we stretch far enough....

Yeah, but doesnt fit into anyone with a 'guns-made-america-free' world view.

 

[skyking]

I think of that in terms of the century plus of colonialism where the western powers showed the whole world how it was done, how to exploit people and resources to maximum effect. That was right after the century plus of straight up enslavement. The western powers set that bar

 

[Thump553]

Stalin was a debutante compared to Mao.

A quick google search shows Stalin responsible for 60 million death, Mao for 65 million. One of the worst things about both of them is that is was mostly their own countrymen they had killed.

 

[amenx]

A quick google search shows Stalin responsible for 60 million death, Mao for 65 million. One of the worst things about both of them is that is was mostly their own countrymen they had killed.

Pol Pot was a great admirer of both, esp Mao and his Great Leap Forward that resulted in the death of millions. Just that Pol Pot was a bit more efficient and didnt like to waste bullets. So blunt trauma was a method of choice to dispose of people. Not sure which is worse, that or chemicals or starvation or disease, but all methods have been employed by despots.

 

[sportage]

My Q niece and the Q's are holocaust deniers. I don't know if the following assessment is typical with the Q people, but my niece who is 38 was never into politics. Of all the things in her life politics was not one of her interest or concerns. Then out of the blue, TOTALLY OUT OF THE BLUE, she becomes a Trumpie and gets involved with the conspiracies and the Q's and now she watches hours of video mostly from Q sites like Bitchute, the home of the Q's morons.

So as I said, I don't know if this is typical of all Q's, but my niece had zero interest in politics before Donald Trump came along. Then she found Trump, fell for the conspiracies, and fell for people like Mike Flynn. So the point where she became politically involved or "politically aware" she had never understood past history i.e. the holocaust or Hitler or Vietnam or any of the wars. If you were sheltered from politics up to the point of Donald Trump then that could explain the holocaust denier. They just never knew the truth, they weren't paying attention, then a group like the Q's convince her and others that history was a lie and the holocaust never happened.

I mean.... I don't know. I'm trying to figure out where she is coming from and how a very intelligent, popular person like my niece could have fallen for such nonsense?
But I do understand how a cult can totally absorb the minds and souls of their victim. I've seen it close up with my niece.

 

[Thump553]

Pol Pot was a great admirer of both, esp Mao and his Great Leap Forward that resulted in the death of millions. Just that Pol Pot was a bit more efficient and didnt like to waste bullets. So blunt trauma was a method of choice to dispose of people. Not sure which is worse, that or chemicals or starvation or disease, but all methods have been employed by despots.

I was thinking of mentioning Pol Pot as well -he certainly was way up there (maybe even the leader) on the percentage of his country's population he killed, but it is a small country so the total death toll was two million at most. Pol Pot was relevant to this thread-his was such a small and poor country that not only didn't he use chemicals, but also used very few bullets, most of his victims was slaughtered, bludgeoned or staved/worked to death as slave labor.

It seems like mass murder is increasing, not decreasing, as society supposedly becomes more advanced.

 

[dlerious]

I don't know that the abhorrence towards chemical weapons (as used by the likes of Saddam) is directly due to the Holocaust. The Holocaust wasn't exclusively carried out with poison gas, they also shot large numbers of people. Early on they gassed people using Carbon Monoxide from vehicle exhausts. The distinguishing feature was the industrial scale of it and that the targets were defenseless civilians. The distaste for chemical weapons surely predates the Holocaust?

The Geneva Protocol - 1925

1925 Geneva Protocol – UNODA

www.un.org

 

[pmv]

Pol Pot was a great admirer of both, esp Mao and his Great Leap Forward that resulted in the death of millions. Just that Pol Pot was a bit more efficient and didnt like to waste bullets. So blunt trauma was a method of choice to dispose of people. Not sure which is worse, that or chemicals or starvation or disease, but all methods have been employed by despots.

There was also Rwanda - very low-tech mass murder. Just huge numbers of killers with machetes.

And of course several million died in the course of the slave trade. Just spread out over a longer time period than most mass killings. The slave trade that built American capitalism.

 

[dawp]

Communist China pollutes it's waters and air way more than capitalistic America does.

that may be the case now(except for agriculture run-off that is) but our history of polluting runs deep until regulations started to curb it

"The River Caught Fire": The Cuyahoga River Fire of 1969 — The Collaborative on Health and the Environment

Lessons Learned: Looking Back to Go ForwardA series of articles exploring historical events that provide an important lesson for ensuring a more sustainable and healthy environment. Originally...

www.healthandenvironment.org

 

[Captante]

she had never understood past history

First of all I'm really sorry to hear that about your niece... that completely sucks.

Really drives home why the crappy GOP and the Dumpster are so anti-education. A lot of history that we here learned going to school (and living through it!) these folks were literally never exposed to at all.

This is why misinformation works so well in 'murica.

 

[Bitek]

Before I answer, do Russian orcs count as people?


But generally, no. Blow em up like grandad did.