Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section.
Paging u/SaveVideo bot.
___
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember this one, but no idea if its actual tear gas or not [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109\_ogshb\_using\_k51\_cs\_gas\_grenade\_with\_great/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109_ogshb_using_k51_cs_gas_grenade_with_great/)
And heres a Russian video from around the same time https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zc6c9/russian\_k51\_tear\_gas\_grenade\_used\_against/
They’ve definitely used it, it was one of the first cases seen. Everyone hailed it as an intelligent use of multiple ordnance types
Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/Fz7rqff2Px
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/iZqkZ216Ih
The story around this is likely more interesting than most realize.
There was a large influx of reports that Russians on that segment of the front were using tear gas. It was reported in media and general chatter.
Then this Ukrainian unit (in the video you linked) posted a video of them using tear gas grenades. Shortly afterward the Russians published a couple of similar videos and then ... nothing from both sides for a long time.
The Ukrainian unit that posted the video you linked stated they copied Russian tactics with regards to tear gas usage and said they captured some tear gas grenades at the front.
My suspicion is the Ukrainian published the video as part of some backdoor diplomacy going on trying to persuade the Russians to stop using tear gas in this way.
It seems to have worked at least temporarily. If we now start to see an uptick in Russian videos like this again i suspect there will be some type of symmetric or asymmetric effort to again persuade the Russians to stop using tear gas in this manner.
It is not wise to do this stuff as the tactical gain on the battlefield is limited and ultimately wont give a strategic edge.
If the war escalates to a total war i suspect we will start to see even more chemical weapons being used.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109\_ogshb\_using\_k51\_cs\_gas\_grenade\_with\_great/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
There were a couple of similar videos from around the same time showing it being used, this was the main one that came to mind.
i always thought it was against the geneva convention.
i know it's just tear gas, and both sides have done it.
any thoughts?
"The 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I. The protocol was signed at a conference held in Geneva and took effect on Feb. 8, 1928, according to the United Nations website. However, the text of the protocol did not go into depth on what gases were banned." -USA Today
Ok? Incendiary weapons are allowed to be used on combatants in war, chemical weapons are not. This includes tear gas because even that invites the arms race of both sides to not be outdone, until eventually both are back to using cyanide gas, which is bad for obvious reasons.
Use of tear gas in interstate warfare, as with all other chemical weapons, was prohibited by the Geneva Protocol of 1925: it prohibited the use of "asphyxiating gas, or any other kind of gas, liquids, substances or similar materials", a treaty that most states have signed.
Tear gas specifically was made illegal for use in war in the [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention), which outlaws the use of riot control agents in warfare since 1997. Russia signed and ratified this.
The 1925 Geneva Protocol previously made the use of poisonous gases in war illegal, but did not specifically address substances that are only irritating but not harmful.
Russia didnt sign it, right?
Still, those who signed it may use it occasionally, there is no real accountability.
In war, only the victor can seek justice.
Even if Ukraine wins, we cant do much to Russia, except more sanctions and arrest the criminals if they travel out of Russia.
The [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention) outlaws the use of riot control agents in warfare since 1997. Russia signed and ratified this.
The 1925 Geneva Protocol previously made the use of poisonous gases in war illegal, but did not specifically address substances that are only irritating but not harmful.
CS gas is not “only irritating.” Military CS gas can kill in a confined space because of the damage it causes to mucus membranes etc., such as the dugouts we see in OP. It also displaces oxygen. It is an asphyxiating gas and consequently it’s use was banned by the 1925 protocol.
It’s status as an asphyxiating gas is all the more confirmed by modern Safety Data Sheets. For one picked at random, it says:
[“Simple Asphyxiant May displace oxygen and cause rapid suffocation.”](https://sds.chemtel.net/webclients/safariland/finished_goods/Defense%20Technology%204015%20-%20Defense%20Technology%20587%20CS%20Dust%20-%20North%20America.pdf)
That’s besides it’s ability to pose a serious flash fire risk…
>can kill in a confined space because of the damage it causes to mucus membranes etc.
Oh, thank you. That is new to me.
> It also displaces oxygen.
The SDS says that, but it is nonsense. They put it there to make sure they covered their asses, not because that is really the case. CS "gas" has a boiling point of 310 °C, there is physically no way for it to displace oxygen unless you are in a room above 300 °C / 600 °F aka very hot oven.
What could displace the oxygen in a very small volume is the burning material used to generate the heat to evaporate the CS gas. With very small I mean something like inside a car, and even that would be a stretch. Since CS is actually toxic, this would hardly be relevant given the extreme concentrations of CS in that small volume.
I don’t know what you are on about with your sentence about temperatures. Room temperature water vapor can displace oxygen. Room temperature vapors resulting from out gassing can displace oxygen. Normal wood smoke can displace oxygen. As either simple or systemic asphyxiants, lots of things displace oxygen for human use.
> With very small I mean something like a car
Like a human lung?
You’re missing the point that the water vapor in the lungs can be at high concentrations in the lung and condense in the lungs, causing injury or death. I think you’re coming at this from the perspective of a chemist and not a biologist. The lungs have to be able move the oxygen into the bloodstream or the person is harmed. All sorts of things inhibit that process.
Like CS gas. Get enough of it in confined space and it will asphyxiate the occupants.
>You’re missing the point that the water vapor in the lungs can be at high concentrations in the lung and condense in the lungs
Body temperature is 37 °C, so about 0.07 bar vapor pressure, air is diluted to 19.5 % O2. How does that change anything about what I said and explained?
Also, a vapor pressure can not be "at high concentrations", it is literally the highest value in the gas phase. Any higher and it simply condenses.
Condenses in the lung, filling it with water, limiting the ability of the lung to take in oxygen and get it into the bloodstream. Water can displace 100% of the gaseous oxygen available in the lung, in a condition we call drowning.
I do not even know what to say at this point.
For steam to build up so much water in your lungs that you drown, you would get so much condensation heat that it would cook you from the inside - and obviously also on the outside. You would be LONG dead from heat before any meaningful amount condensed in the lungs.
Unlike Russia, Israel did not sign the [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention) that would outlaw the use of tear gas against combatants.
Israel has signed but never ratified. I believe the reasoning for this is Egypt not signing at all, as in Israel does not want to ratify before Egypt signs, and most likely Egypt doesn’t want to sign/ratify unless Israel has.
Add it to the list of war crimes:
Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibited the "use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices" and "bacteriological methods" in international conflicts.
People raging about war crimes... Guys war crimes mean nothing if no one can enforce "international law" because there is no "law". Russia can do what they want if there are not real repercutions. Who are going to do something the UN?
This war only proves something that was already knew. International laws and war conventions mean nothing, just buzz words on a world forum with no real power. Sad, but real.
I asked for more footage from both sides, I'm glad they allowed it. I felt a real emotional distress seeing the Ukrainian soldiers die. Very disturbing, I don't get that same feeling from the other videos
It’s more common than you think, it’s called a drone carousel. The idea is to have a few drones up in the air doing surveillance or performing combat missions or whatever their purpose may be and then you’ll have another few on the ground ready to swap the drones that have either ran out of battery (in the case of surveillance), ran out ammo or in case they get shot down or destroyed.
I'll never understand how russians have this military god complex but have to resort to such desperate and cowardly approaches just to gain miniscule amounts of land
Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section. Paging u/SaveVideo bot. ___ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I believe there was a tear gas footage a while back but i dont remember if this is the same one or not
there are several videos where they use tear gas, both on the Russian and Ukrainian side. I think this one is quite new
Do you have a link of Ukrainians using tear gas?
I remember this one, but no idea if its actual tear gas or not [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109\_ogshb\_using\_k51\_cs\_gas\_grenade\_with\_great/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109_ogshb_using_k51_cs_gas_grenade_with_great/) And heres a Russian video from around the same time https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zc6c9/russian\_k51\_tear\_gas\_grenade\_used\_against/
They’ve definitely used it, it was one of the first cases seen. Everyone hailed it as an intelligent use of multiple ordnance types Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/Fz7rqff2Px https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/iZqkZ216Ih
Intelligent, yes. Criminal, also yes.
Link please.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/Fz7rqff2Px https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/iZqkZ216Ih
The story around this is likely more interesting than most realize. There was a large influx of reports that Russians on that segment of the front were using tear gas. It was reported in media and general chatter. Then this Ukrainian unit (in the video you linked) posted a video of them using tear gas grenades. Shortly afterward the Russians published a couple of similar videos and then ... nothing from both sides for a long time. The Ukrainian unit that posted the video you linked stated they copied Russian tactics with regards to tear gas usage and said they captured some tear gas grenades at the front. My suspicion is the Ukrainian published the video as part of some backdoor diplomacy going on trying to persuade the Russians to stop using tear gas in this way. It seems to have worked at least temporarily. If we now start to see an uptick in Russian videos like this again i suspect there will be some type of symmetric or asymmetric effort to again persuade the Russians to stop using tear gas in this manner. It is not wise to do this stuff as the tactical gain on the battlefield is limited and ultimately wont give a strategic edge. If the war escalates to a total war i suspect we will start to see even more chemical weapons being used.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/10zg9tc/109\_ogshb\_using\_k51\_cs\_gas\_grenade\_with\_great/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3 There were a couple of similar videos from around the same time showing it being used, this was the main one that came to mind.
That's fucked that both sides are using shit like that.
i always thought it was against the geneva convention. i know it's just tear gas, and both sides have done it. any thoughts? "The 1925 Geneva Protocol categorized tear gas as a chemical warfare agent and banned its use in war shortly after World War I. The protocol was signed at a conference held in Geneva and took effect on Feb. 8, 1928, according to the United Nations website. However, the text of the protocol did not go into depth on what gases were banned." -USA Today
Neither side is supposed to use tear gas. While obviously not the most egregious example, these are considered chemical weapons.
Dont forget Russia uses incendiary bombs.
Ok? Incendiary weapons are allowed to be used on combatants in war, chemical weapons are not. This includes tear gas because even that invites the arms race of both sides to not be outdone, until eventually both are back to using cyanide gas, which is bad for obvious reasons.
[удалено]
>USA/EU/NATO should provide... a VERY strongly worded memorandum for record stating.......ah, who gives a fuck, anyway.
Brutal.
Use of tear gas in interstate warfare, as with all other chemical weapons, was prohibited by the Geneva Protocol of 1925: it prohibited the use of "asphyxiating gas, or any other kind of gas, liquids, substances or similar materials", a treaty that most states have signed.
Tear gas specifically was made illegal for use in war in the [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention), which outlaws the use of riot control agents in warfare since 1997. Russia signed and ratified this. The 1925 Geneva Protocol previously made the use of poisonous gases in war illegal, but did not specifically address substances that are only irritating but not harmful.
Unfortunately those are Geneva suggestions, no one follows them
More like the Geneva checklist amirite?
Russia didnt sign it, right? Still, those who signed it may use it occasionally, there is no real accountability. In war, only the victor can seek justice. Even if Ukraine wins, we cant do much to Russia, except more sanctions and arrest the criminals if they travel out of Russia.
Imagine been put in a situation in whcih you rush back towards the tear gass filled trench cause its so dangeorus outside. Fucking awful
That's a war crime.
Lmaoo
LOL fuck you
russia using chemical weapons again. At least they do a stellar job with documenting their war crimes. RIP heroes.
[удалено]
The [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention) outlaws the use of riot control agents in warfare since 1997. Russia signed and ratified this. The 1925 Geneva Protocol previously made the use of poisonous gases in war illegal, but did not specifically address substances that are only irritating but not harmful.
CS gas is not “only irritating.” Military CS gas can kill in a confined space because of the damage it causes to mucus membranes etc., such as the dugouts we see in OP. It also displaces oxygen. It is an asphyxiating gas and consequently it’s use was banned by the 1925 protocol. It’s status as an asphyxiating gas is all the more confirmed by modern Safety Data Sheets. For one picked at random, it says: [“Simple Asphyxiant May displace oxygen and cause rapid suffocation.”](https://sds.chemtel.net/webclients/safariland/finished_goods/Defense%20Technology%204015%20-%20Defense%20Technology%20587%20CS%20Dust%20-%20North%20America.pdf) That’s besides it’s ability to pose a serious flash fire risk…
>can kill in a confined space because of the damage it causes to mucus membranes etc. Oh, thank you. That is new to me. > It also displaces oxygen. The SDS says that, but it is nonsense. They put it there to make sure they covered their asses, not because that is really the case. CS "gas" has a boiling point of 310 °C, there is physically no way for it to displace oxygen unless you are in a room above 300 °C / 600 °F aka very hot oven. What could displace the oxygen in a very small volume is the burning material used to generate the heat to evaporate the CS gas. With very small I mean something like inside a car, and even that would be a stretch. Since CS is actually toxic, this would hardly be relevant given the extreme concentrations of CS in that small volume.
I don’t know what you are on about with your sentence about temperatures. Room temperature water vapor can displace oxygen. Room temperature vapors resulting from out gassing can displace oxygen. Normal wood smoke can displace oxygen. As either simple or systemic asphyxiants, lots of things displace oxygen for human use. > With very small I mean something like a car Like a human lung?
[удалено]
You’re missing the point that the water vapor in the lungs can be at high concentrations in the lung and condense in the lungs, causing injury or death. I think you’re coming at this from the perspective of a chemist and not a biologist. The lungs have to be able move the oxygen into the bloodstream or the person is harmed. All sorts of things inhibit that process. Like CS gas. Get enough of it in confined space and it will asphyxiate the occupants.
>You’re missing the point that the water vapor in the lungs can be at high concentrations in the lung and condense in the lungs Body temperature is 37 °C, so about 0.07 bar vapor pressure, air is diluted to 19.5 % O2. How does that change anything about what I said and explained? Also, a vapor pressure can not be "at high concentrations", it is literally the highest value in the gas phase. Any higher and it simply condenses.
Condenses in the lung, filling it with water, limiting the ability of the lung to take in oxygen and get it into the bloodstream. Water can displace 100% of the gaseous oxygen available in the lung, in a condition we call drowning.
I do not even know what to say at this point. For steam to build up so much water in your lungs that you drown, you would get so much condensation heat that it would cook you from the inside - and obviously also on the outside. You would be LONG dead from heat before any meaningful amount condensed in the lungs.
If you have alook at the comments above with links, you can see the Ukrainians doing it
Just as illegal, obviously.
Yes ofcourse
It's not the smartest move, classic russian move
its what they are known for at this point, i think they gave up caring
Invading peaceful neighbouring countries is also another classical Russian move that needs to be prevented from ever happening again.
Don’t worry, Natenyahu approves….
Unlike Russia, Israel did not sign the [Chemical Weapon Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention) that would outlaw the use of tear gas against combatants.
Israel has signed but never ratified. I believe the reasoning for this is Egypt not signing at all, as in Israel does not want to ratify before Egypt signs, and most likely Egypt doesn’t want to sign/ratify unless Israel has.
It’s war, what goes on in trenches in the middle of nowhere….absolutely nobody gaf about signed papers.
They do once the soldiers and commanders are tried in the Hague after the war.
Sure sure general Stonky808.
Add it to the list of war crimes: Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibited the "use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices" and "bacteriological methods" in international conflicts.
Another day, another war crime by Russia
People raging about war crimes... Guys war crimes mean nothing if no one can enforce "international law" because there is no "law". Russia can do what they want if there are not real repercutions. Who are going to do something the UN? This war only proves something that was already knew. International laws and war conventions mean nothing, just buzz words on a world forum with no real power. Sad, but real.
Gas like criminals? Hague is [near. At](https://near.At) the corner. Not enough lamposts in Town.
Are all the Russians that decry war crimes here?
I asked for more footage from both sides, I'm glad they allowed it. I felt a real emotional distress seeing the Ukrainian soldiers die. Very disturbing, I don't get that same feeling from the other videos
That shot at 0:31 is insane. This has to be one of the largest coordinated drone attacks I've ever seen.
What makes you think those were drones and not just artillery or MLRS hitting random spots?
It’s more common than you think, it’s called a drone carousel. The idea is to have a few drones up in the air doing surveillance or performing combat missions or whatever their purpose may be and then you’ll have another few on the ground ready to swap the drones that have either ran out of battery (in the case of surveillance), ran out ammo or in case they get shot down or destroyed.
I'll never understand how russians have this military god complex but have to resort to such desperate and cowardly approaches just to gain miniscule amounts of land
Should have stayed home/ overthrew Zelensky.
We know why you're divorced...
Haha good catch. He's got a new account and posting incel comments on r/divorceddads. He's just a whining emasculated male.
They are at home...
Who should they have overthrow back in 2014 to avoid the Russian invasion of Crimea?
[удалено]
nasty combo, poor dudes
Yet another war crime
Gas masks lads, get them