If Russia is using nerve gas weapons, Biden says we will respond "in kind". Can we/should we do that?

Source? That seems very unlikely to me that he meant we would use nerve gas.

I found a link that said “severe price.” I didn’t see anything that said “in kind.” Do you have a link? Here’s the link that said severe price:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/biden-vows-russia-will-pay-a-severe-price-if-it-uses-chemical-weapons-in-ukraine/ar-AAUWuLA?ocid=uxbndlbing

It’s always helptul to provide a link when making a statement.

Can we??? Yes
Should we??? NO!!!

World leaders play the game of Chicken every day & I’m hoping that is ALL this is!!!

Chemical Weapons: On the prospect of Russia using chemical weapons amid the invasion of Ukraine, Biden said only that “we would respond.” The President did not offer more specifics, saying only that “the nature of the response would depend on the nature of use.”

Media hype. I refuse to listen to any of it. So should Joe.

Yup. He said it!

Yes we can.
No we shouldn’t.

Bio & chemical weapons are avoided for more than just ethical reasons. In a battlefield environment they’re nearly impossible to control & manage effectively. Collateral damage to friendly forces, civilian population, and nearby neutral countries is almost certain.

And as far as whatever Joe did/didn’t say…

News rating service Ad Fontes gives Media ite a 39.9 score for reliability, out of a max 64 :
https://adfontesmedia.com/mediaite-bias-and-reliability/

Just saying.

There is more to nerve gas in the issue of chemical warfare. There are also blood and skin agents. Biological weapons deal in germs, sicknesses.

None of the reasoning I’ve heard from the Administration makes sense to me. If Russia uses nerve gas there’ll be consequences (or words to that effect).

I’m obviously not perceiving this correctly. We’re watching a country get invaded and bombed to oblivion on Prime Time news and you’re telling us NERVE GAS is where NATO draws the line.

What am I not understanding about this? This really sounds like a really SPECIAL kind of stupid.

So, until nerve gas is introduced we’ll sit comfortably ringside and continue watching Russia bomb the hell out of an entire population.

(Not our fight…good for the ratings…sell a few more cars…)

I get it.

I kind of understand NATO unwillingness to do anything aggressively constructive to prevent further death of innocent lives (though it seems like the humane thing to do). But in the very least it makes more sense to me that if nerve gas is where NATO chooses to draw the line then MAYBE they should just continue to sit on the sidelines and shut the ____ up.