• Sean Spicer just said that "Even Hitler didn't use chemical weapons"

  • Discuss current events / serious things here. Needless flaming / idiocy are grounds for banning.
Discuss current events / serious things here. Needless flaming / idiocy are grounds for banning.
 #4940  by lemmiwinx
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:04 pm
PlusCaChange wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:33 pm
The difference is in the term 'weapon'. The most common meaning of weapon is "an instrument of attack or defense in combat". Killing people completely under your control in gas chambers is horrific but it's not combat.
Exactly right. You have to love how the lefty media tries to turn every word out of Spicer's mouth into a scandal. It's not working guys.
 #4949  by kocher
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:41 pm
lemmiwinx wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:04 pm
PlusCaChange wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:33 pm
The difference is in the term 'weapon'. The most common meaning of weapon is "an instrument of attack or defense in combat". Killing people completely under your control in gas chambers is horrific but it's not combat.
Exactly right. You have to love how the lefty media tries to turn every word out of Spicer's mouth into a scandal. It's not working guys.
Although I agree reporting Spicer as a Holocaust denier is an unjustified call for blood, the distinction between chemical weapon and chemical "gassing of controlled audiences" wasn't made. You can create your own defense for his argument, but that's not what he said.

Regardless, being that these chemicals were used during wartime on prisoner's of war and that use of the word "attack" can be subjective to this stance, I think the distinction is nominal.
 #4953  by Tim_Kerr
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:45 pm
lemmiwinx wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:04 pm

Exactly right. You have to love how the lefty media tries to turn every word out of Spicer's mouth into a scandal. It's not working guys.
rule#
2. No trolling


I think Spicers days are numbered, bet he resigns in the next couple weeks.
Who will be the next Ringmaster?
 #4959  by lemmiwinx
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:55 pm
Tim_Kerr wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:45 pm
lemmiwinx wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:04 pm

Exactly right. You have to love how the lefty media tries to turn every word out of Spicer's mouth into a scandal. It's not working guys.
rule#
2. No trolling


I think Spicers days are numbered, bet he resigns in the next couple weeks.
Who will be the next Ringmaster?
I don't think Spicer's going anywhere until Trump's second term. That's when press secretaries usually go out into media world and start pulling down the big bucks.
 #4964  by PlusCaChange
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:10 pm
I think the distinction is nominal.
If by that you mean his problem was a sloppy use of language I'd agree. He's a prime example of what happens when you become accustomed to using words without thinking much about what they mean. He was trying to convey the gravity of using chemical weapons and his hyperbole and fuzzy thinking combined in a synergy of idiocy.

I was responding more to the quote in the title of the thread. It's quite correct to say Hitler never used chemical weapons, what's idiotic is to take this as an indication Assad has done something even more morally reprehensible than anything Hitler ever did. The big H still holds the record for abomination, with Pol Pot coming a strong second.
 #4967  by Tim_Kerr
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:19 pm
The big H still holds the record for abomination, with Pol Pot coming a strong second.

I think you should get your fact checker to go over this statement.

If it's democide which i think you're referring to then china,russia (a close second) then germany... :?
 #4968  by Hakik
 Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:24 pm
PlusCaChange wrote:
Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:33 pm
The difference is in the term 'weapon'. The most common meaning of weapon is "an instrument of attack or defense in combat". Killing people completely under your control in gas chambers is horrific but it's not combat.
Actually, the Nazis did use chemical weapons against the Soviet Union in Crimea. But that still doesn't change anything.

There's no use trying to grasp at straws here. That's a simple case of incompetence at a news conference with an alarming lack of knowledge of history, presented by someone who has no business giving speeches on behalf of the most powerful country in the world.