Spicer WasNot The Only One .......

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Chris Matthews: Hitler never used chemical weapons
Overlooks Nazi dictator's gassing of defenseless Jews in concentration camps


In an appearance on the “Morning Joe” show Tuesday, MSNBC host Chris Matthews declared confidently that Adolf Hitler did not use chemical weapons in World War II.

Matthews compared the dictator of Nazi Germany to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, stating (emphasis added):

The problem is, I don’t like it, first of all I’m rather dovish, I don’t like what I’m going to say but it’s true. 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. Although we do know that Assad’s father did. And then he goes ahead and does it. It makes you wonder what the mullahs will do if they have a couple of nuclear weapons, just a couple. Are they capable of not using them? And that, of course, you know, I think that everybody talking this morning is projecting toward that, which is if you can’t use deterrents the normal way – mutually assured destruction – you can’t say, if you do this, we’re blowing you up. If that doesn’t work, what does work? And that’s the problem.



maybe on a technicality .... no chemical weapons were user in combat on either front, but that ignores what went on in the camps
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
you are pulling my leg right ?

you forgot the sarcasm tag

No. Sincere question. The answer most accept is probably not true. That doesn't change a thing about Nazi hatred of Jews or other 'inferiors' nor mass death. There is simply reason to not accept the story that gas was used to kill people en masse and that's NOT to say they didn't try it. It's just not as effective and efficient as other means. But, like 'assault rifles' and 'terrorists' it's a term that helps scare people even more while avoiding uncomfortable questions.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
No. Sincere question. The answer most accept is probably not true. That doesn't change a thing about Nazi hatred of Jews or other 'inferiors' nor mass death. There is simply reason to not accept the story that gas was used to kill people en masse and that's NOT to say they didn't try it. It's just not as effective and efficient as other means. But, like 'assault rifles' and 'terrorists' it's a term that helps scare people even more while avoiding uncomfortable questions.



all that aside ... a PBS Article I just read suggested 1.1 million

I'm not sure I would call Zkloyn B a 'chemical weapon' in the vain of WMD's but concentration camp inmates were executed in showers with the Zyklon B.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Odd, first thing I thought when I heard Spicers statement was that he was referring to launching attacks with chemical weapons. And in that sense, the statement is true. But the stake is in the woodpile, torches are already lit, the mob wont be happy until he's tied to the stake. And nobody has the cojones to defend him. Shoulda been simple. "Sorry folks, I should have been more clear, I meant 'In combat".
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
...concentration camp inmates were executed in showers with the Zyklon B.

There is evidence that that is not true and, even if it were totally true, why is that death worse than working people to death, starving them to death or simply shooting them? And why wouldn't they have used military grade gases like chlorine instead of a disinfectant/insecticide? Any sort of skepticism or sense of free inquiry would make those questions common sense to ask. In short, Zyclon B was a really poor choice for the task.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Just shows that the Left will make hay out of anything, regardless of how insignificant it is. It's clear what Spicer meant, and clear that he made a misstatement. Why are we still talking about this days later?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
There is evidence that that is not true and, even if it were totally true, why is that death worse than working people to death, starving them to death or simply shooting them? And why wouldn't they have used military grade gases like chlorine instead of a disinfectant/insecticide? Any sort of skepticism or sense of free inquiry would make those questions common sense to ask. In short, Zyclon B was a really poor choice for the task.

What I've read - and recall --

There WERE camps for stronger prisoners - and they WERE worked. There were also camps specifically for extermination - and every camp used its own method. Some DID execute with guns.
Many used gas, but some used carbon monoxide.

The best reason I've seen for gassing is that as brutal as the Germans were to undesirables - killing them directly had a strong psychological effect on them. It was easier to load them into chambers and pull out bodies than to personally partake in killing them and watching them die. I've seen this reason given MANY times - German soldiers would begin to feel a trace of sympathy and guilt - and gas chambers made that easier.

Frankly that strikes me as even MORE evil by the men who perpetrated it - so determined to kill people, they found ways to get men who wouldn't do it normally to be ok with doing it.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Just shows that the Left will make hay out of anything, regardless of how insignificant it is. It's clear what Spicer meant, and clear that he made a misstatement. Why are we still talking about this days later?

Grant whatever you wish about the left, how does that stop, in any way, someone from the right asking a simple question:

'Are you objecting to us attacking Assad, thus and defending his use of gas and are you asking for yet another 'red' line or what?'

The right is standing around like a bunch of freaking morons saying "Uh, we hate Hitler!" instead of just engaging on what the left SAYS and DOES.


Everyone in this thread so far is worried about adhering to the historical narrative and completely avoiding what is being said; Spicer, as I understand it, was JUSTIFYING attacking a guy who used chemical weapons on helpless people.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Everyone in this thread so far is worried about adhering to the historical narrative and completely avoiding what is being said ...



that was not the question you asked ...... and I clarified - aprox 1.1 million people were gassed out of 6.x million that would be 1/6
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
It's clear what Spicer meant, and clear that he made a misstatement. Why are we still talking about this days later?



I missed what Spicer said initially, I merely found it amusing Chrissy Tingles made the same 'error'
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Grant whatever you wish about the left, how does that stop, in any way, someone from the right asking a simple question:

'Are you objecting to us attacking Assad, thus and defending his use of gas and are you asking for yet another 'red' line or what?'

Having asked a similar question to my lefty pals, I can tell you what the response is: they get pissed and go on an off topic unrelated attack. Engaging them and trying to get them to explain their position is a futile and frustrating endeavor. It's pointless and I hope with all my heart that Sean Spicer has better things to do with his time than stand there and argue with nonsensical ranters.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Having asked a similar question to my lefty pals, I can tell you what the response is: they get pissed and go on an off topic unrelated attack. Engaging them and trying to get them to explain their position is a futile and frustrating endeavor. It's pointless and I hope with all my heart that Sean Spicer has better things to do with his time than stand there and argue with nonsensical ranters.

He could do it; "Are you saying we shouldn't have gone after Assad? Or that FDR should have gone after Hitler. I only say this because Hitler is dead and we can't go after him and Assad is alive and we can go after him. Oh, yeah, and we did."
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Well: I could be wrong maybe you are a holocaust denier.
Probably think we blew up the WTC ourselves too.

Mr. critical thinker.

When was the last time you challenged yourself on something you were sure you knew and turned out you found you learned a lot or were even wrong? Did that process of learning begin with keeping your head in the sand or....challenging yourself?
 
Top