HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » One question DUers: Is t...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:23 PM

One question DUers: Is teargas a chemical weapon? nt

11 replies, 870 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply One question DUers: Is teargas a chemical weapon? nt (Original post)
kelliekat44 Dec 2012 OP
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #1
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #5
Bandit Dec 2012 #6
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #8
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #2
clydefrand Dec 2012 #3
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #9
mike_c Dec 2012 #4
Deep13 Dec 2012 #7
Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #10
kelliekat44 Dec 2012 #11

Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:25 PM

1. It is considered a chemical weapon under the Geneva Conventions, but only if used against combatants

 

on the field of battle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:31 PM

5. Correct answer.

You can torture and mutilate your civilians with it, but not an invading enemy army.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:35 PM

6. We used CS quite often in Vietnam, especially when we came across enemy bunkers

we often used CS gas against enemy troops, not to kill but to drive them out of their holes. we also used CS against US Marines whenever we could... We considered that great fun....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:00 PM

8. I beleive it was banned from the battle field in the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993

 

Use of Lacrymatory Agents is banned on the battlefield under current treaties. Production and stockpiling is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:26 PM

2. No, since it's intent is not to kill

It s considered a less than lethal weapon, which means in some cases it can kill...see asthma sufferers for example.

Some in the international community have tried to reclasify it as a chemical weapon, but good luck on that.

Oh and I forgot, if you use it against actual combatants in war, it enters the classification since it disables people. That is the point made by those trying to reclass it and remove t from police forces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:27 PM

3. It wasn't considered that in 1953 when I went in Army

I think the definition for 'chemical weapon' is one that can cause death, or near death. (tear gas only make you think you're going to die)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clydefrand (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:01 PM

9. It's a Lacrymatory Agent

 

Those are banned from use on the battlefield.

Now, when engaged in peacekeeping missions, soldiers can use Lacrymatory Agents as general riot control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:27 PM

4. define weapon....

That's the crux of your question, I think. Tear gas is certainly a volatile chemical. Are "crowd control" agents "weapons?" Other weapons can clearly be used for crowd control, but then, is water from a hose also a "chemical weapon?" High pressure H2O, e.g. from a water cannon?

My personal opinion is that tear gas is a non-lethal chemical weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:37 PM

7. Yes.

It is designed to hurt people and it does so by chemistry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 04:03 PM

10. Yes, as the first reply states, as well as the US being signatories against its use

 

on the battlefield. The same with pepper-spray. Fuck US protesters, though. They don't count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:01 PM

11. Interesting. Thank you, all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread