Because liberals want to save the world, and conservatives want to act tough.

There is no such thing as good guys and bad guys, there are only winners and losers especially when it comes to nations. The winners are heroes and the losers are terrorist, thugs, villains you name it. Winners write the history and the losers condemn it. So when all is said and done, try to be on the winning team.

Is that part of the brainwashing in USA?
Everything is black and white?
You're either with is or against us?
Criticism is recruiting terrorists?
Criticising the USA is supporting ISIS?

A lot of terrorism is blowback from things the US has done in the past. A lot of terrorism is blown out of proportion as well, mostly used for fear mongering. IRA, ETA, plain / train hijackings were all much more frequent when I grew up.

Anyway I'm glad the most recent thing on that list is tear gas. Great progress to go from nuclear bombs to tear gas if you ask me. Is the military still using depleted uranium ammo though? That stuff should be outlawed. How many soldiers got sick from that? I'm sure sacrificing yourself for your country doesn't include radiation poisinging by your own country.

Nah. You can criticise. It's cool. The OP has a pattern, though. I'm legitimately wondering what his angle is.

off-topic...I've tried tear gas too in the military. We were given a choice to try tear gas raw and of course me and few others volunteered. That stuff is nasty, straight up nasty. To my understanding pepper spray can be withstood but the only way to survive against tear gas is to not breath at all, once you do breath you are done. Ok, so we went to a freight container and it was totally closed space and then came the tear gas. It wasn't many seconds but I remember all of us reacted to the tear gas in the same exact moment. We had planned a contest beforehand who stays the longest but when the effects hit, we all ran out as fast as possible...no, it wasn't actually running it was more like we exited the container any means possible. Once outside, everyone was stuck with the continuos vomit reflex, eyes burning and tearing so badly you couldn't keep them open making you almost blind. Unreal stuff, a human being is completely defenseless against tear gas.

My experience as well. Pretty identical.

In training, I was told pepper spray doesn't effect some people but goddam. I can't imagine how.

It were the dolphins and whales. The dolphins and whales bombed japan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEUcQtPwZ0U

Pretty much.

That's why all the countries on top have so many allies despite all the protests.  Countries that are not on top usually hide behind the skirts of those who are on top.  They let them do the dirty work.  Their politicians try to look noble and bold to their people but they know they'd do the very same things if the situation was reversed and they suddenly had to look out for themselves.  

That moral high-ground is usually only taken when it's safe to do so.

The article betrays an ignorance of what constitutes a chemical attack and international law.

Depleted uranium, white phosphorus, and tear gas (seriously?) are all legal materials and can be used in battle, and the cases mentioned are at most a grey area, if not completely fine. Even Napalm is technically legal to be used in battle, though not against civilians. Sarin nerve gas is 100% illegal, on the other hand. It is in a category of chemical weapons which have been banned in battle, and the production and stockpiling of it was banned in the 90s, so it is illegal for a country to even possess it. There is no comparison between the use of those substances and what Syria is accused of under international law.

Also, nuclear weapons are not classified as chemical weapons, so as horrible as the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were, they have no place on a list of 'chemical weapons attacks.' Napalm is also considered conventional, not chemical.

It should be 'the 3-4 chemical materials uses the US doesn't want you to know about.' Those specific incidents are horrible and reflect horribly on the US, but the article has such a blatant agenda and gets more than half of its supposed chemical attacks wrong that it cannot be taken seriously.

Who doesn't want us to know about Agent Orange again? I went to public high school and public university in the United States and it was certainly taught there. The entire Vietnam war is thought of as a horrific blunder in US history.

And number 10 is the atomic bombs? Washington is trying to hide this from us? At least that's the thesis of this article. Well they're doing a pretty bad job because again, it's taught in virtually every public school. Obama made a big show of visiting Hiroshima just last year. This one isn't as black and white as Agent Orange and Vietnam because Japan attacked the United States first and many will argue that the decision to drop the bomb saved American lives.

The middle parts of the list are filled out with police using tear gas?

This is so fucking stupid.