And what is the source? Honest Ukrainian word? But anyway.
"Germany’s BND foreign intelligence agency said Russia has been using not only tear gas but also "the more dangerous chemical chloropicrin, which can be lethal in high concentrations in enclosed spaces". This is a more serious violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, it added."
So using tear gas is a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention? Like London police using tear gas to disperse protesters? [0]
"The chemical [chloropicrin] ... can cause irritation of the lungs, eyes and skin and can cause diarrhoea, vomiting and nausea. "
The real issue to me isn’t whether something is labeled a chemical weapon—it’s the fact that police operate with less stringent rules than paramilitaries.
This is a russian account that has been banned before and that keeps spouting russian propaganda that for some weird reason keeps being given more and more rope. Just so you know what you are reading, see also:
"Germany’s BND foreign intelligence agency said Russia has been using not only tear gas but also "the more dangerous chemical chloropicrin, which can be lethal in high concentrations in enclosed spaces". This is a more serious violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, it added."
So using tear gas is a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention? Like London police using tear gas to disperse protesters? [0]
"The chemical [chloropicrin] ... can cause irritation of the lungs, eyes and skin and can cause diarrhoea, vomiting and nausea. "
But "chemical weapons" make such a good headline.
[0] https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-do...]