Chemical warfare

“ It is, therefore, our intention to present a reasoned account of the development of poison gas, or chemical warfare, during the recent war. But to leave the matter there would be misleading and culpable, for, however interesting the simple facts of the chemical campaign, they owed their being to a combination of forces, whose nature and significance for the future are infinitely more important. The chief cause of the chemical war was an unsound and dangerous world distribution of industrial organic chemical forces. ”

“ Before taking up in some detail the methods of projecting gas upon the enemy, it is very desirable to understand the fundamentals of chemical warfare, in so far as they pertain to poisonous gases. Following the first use of pure chlorine all the principal nations engaged in the war began investigations into a wide range of substances in the hope of finding others more poisonous, more easily produced, and more readily projected upon the enemy. ”

“ Accordingly, chemical warfare is an agency that must not only be reckoned with by every civilized nation in the future, but is one which civilized nations should not hesitate to use. When properly safe-guarded with masks and other safety devices, it gives to the most scientific and most ingenious people a great advantage over the less scientific and less ingenious. Then why should the United States or any other highly civilized country consider giving up chemical warfare? ”

“ Notwithstanding the opposition of certain people who, through ignorance or for other reasons, have fought it, chemical warfare has come to stay, and just in proportion as the United States gives chemical warfare its proper place in its military establishment, just in that proportion will the United States be ready to meet any or all comers in the future, for the United States has incomparable resources in the shape of the crude materials—power, salt, sulfur and the like—that are necessary in the manufacture of gases. ”

“ A few words right here about the humanity of gas are not out of place, notwithstanding the Army and the general public have now so completely indorsed chemical warfare that it is believed the argument of inhumanity has no weight whatever. There were three great reasons why chemical warfare was first widely advertised throughout the world as inhumane and horrible. ”

“ All of this has direct application to training with chemical warfare materials in peace. We believe that all opposition to chemical warfare today can be divided into two classes—those who do not understand it and those who are afraid of it—ignorance and cowardice. Our chemists at Edgewood Arsenal are every day toying with the most powerful chemical compounds; toying with mixtures they know nothing of, not knowing what instant they may induce an explosion of some fearful poisonous gas. But they have learned how to protect themselves. ”

“ Each nation and any League of Nations must seriously face the question of the establishment of elaborate and complex chemical warfare organisations. It seems to me that the logical course of thought and action is as follows. If guarantees are forthcoming, internationally, removing this grave German chemical warfare threat through her manufacturing monopoly, then the need for a definite chemical striking force and organisation will be greatly reduced. National safety is itself a corollary of world disarmament. ”

“ Diphenylchloroarsine, used extensively by the Germans in high explosive shell, is more poisonous than phosgene, the most deadly gas in general use in the past war. In addition, it has the quality of causing an intolerable burning sensation in the nose, throat, and lungs, in extremely minute quantities. This material can be kept out of masks only by filters, whereas true gases are taken out by charcoal and chemical granules.
There is still another quality which helps make chemical warfare the most powerful weapon of war. ”

“ Chemical warfare, however, has introduced a method of blocking out chosen areas of the battle-field in such a way as to prevent their effective use for military defence, communications, or other purposes. It is now possible, by chemical means, to give a normal piece of country the same value as a natural obstacle, or one organised for defence by formidable engineering construction, and manned by rifles and machine-guns. This can be achieved by the use of a highly persistent dangerous gas or war chemical of which, so far, mustard gas is the most effective example. ”

“ In the future Gas Troops will put off the majority of all cloud gas attacks even with toxic smoke candles.
Necessity for Training in Peace. This is an outline of the subject of chemical warfare. As stated in the beginning, the fundamental underlying principles for the successful use of poisonous gas is necessarily the same as for any other war materials. The necessity for continuous training in peace is just the same with chemical warfare as with the rifle, the machine gun, with field artillery or any other weapon of war. ”

“ It is a struggle for the initiative.
More than this, as the use of chemical warfare becomes an organic part of operations, as it did during the war, these operations become correspondingly dependent upon conditions imposed by the chemical campaign. One can imagine the case of an army unprotected against a new gas, aware that the enemy is ready to employ the latter, compelled to postpone some huge offensive until its protective methods were equal to countering the new chemical. ”

“ By permitting the individual soldier to retain the efficient use of his weapons in gas, the mask, or other form of individual protection, may render a costly counter-attack unnecessary. In this way protective methods in chemical warfare may be the determining factor in some strategic campaign or tactical activity. The distinction between tactics and strategy in chemical warfare cannot be made by grouping substances, or their methods of application to war, any more than one can say that certain infantry or artillery formations or weapons have a purely strategic or tactical function. ”

“ I feel sure that the army appreciates the value of chemical warfare, and that it appreciates also the value of the chemists to chemical warfare.
"So long as there is any danger of other nations continuing these methods of warfare, research and experiment in chemical warfare must be pursued. Research must not only be directed towards the gases and apparatus, likely to be employed in the future, but also towards protection against all possible gases. Training in the use of gas will be confined to appropriate branches, but training in defensive measures will include the whole army. ”

“ Conclusion.—We have shown how, during the war, chemical warfare proved its surprise value and how manufacture figured repeatedly as a critical factor. We have also shown how the importance of production is magnified from the point of view of the future. The only logical conclusion is that the country which does not possess a strong dye industry, or enormously comprehensive and expensive chemical arsenals, cannot hope to escape serious military results, possibly defeat, from enemy chemical surprises. ”

“ Report of the Hartley Mission.—Chemical warfare is the point faible in world disarmament. Judging from the above clause of the Treaty, it is clear that this is not fully recognised. Once again our trust is invited in mere prohibition. The lesson of the war is not learnt. The chemical menace is not countered. Why should this be? There are two main reasons. In the first place, very few had any conception of the tremendous growth in this branch of warfare, for facts had rarely been disclosed, and those with no direct contact with chemical warfare were relying on impressions. ”

“ Chemical warfare materials were used during the war by Chemical Warfare Service troops, by the Artillery and by the Infantry. In the future the Air Service and Navy will be added to the above list. Chemical warfare, even under the inelastic methods of the Germans, proved one of the most powerful means of offense with which the American troops had to contend. To realize its effectiveness we need only remember that more than 27 out of every 100 casualties on the field of battle were from gas alone. Unquestionably many of those who died on the battlefield from other causes suffered also from gas. ”

“ Therefore, urgent guarantees for national safety are absolutely essential until the web of peace is strongly organised, which cannot be until the immediate menace of the monopoly in production is removed. But even then, until the general peace is fairly implanted, we must be ready for any surprise from an unscrupulous enemy. Research and training in chemical protection must be continued, and this can only be ensured by keeping abreast with offensive chemical warfare. ”

“ Any new chemical warfare development capable, under a given system of individual protection, of successfully attacking the hitherto protected individual, may be termed strategic. The method may be aimed at a protected or hitherto immune human function, but if it overcomes protection it is then capable of effecting strategic results by its use on a sufficiently large scale. Thus we regard the first introduction of cloud gas by Germany, or their use of mustard gas, as examples of strategic chemical warfare moves. ”

“ We cannot envisage advances in the use of explosives in shell or bomb to render them more humane. Explosives, if their development be pressed, can only become more violent, with a wider range of action. Chemical warfare may follow the same lines, but it has the unique possibility of developing on more humane lines. The vesicant action of mustard gas produced huge casualties with relatively little permanent harm. Chemicals may be found which temporarily influence human functions, enabling military objectives to be attained with a remarkably small amount of pain and death. ”

“ Such are the facts about chemical warfare. They will not be believed because a belief in them would do violence to the sentiments of most people. They will not be promulgated, as there is no money to be made out of them. (Chemical manufacturers make both high explosive and mustard gas, and the former more easily.) ”

“ A good deal of abuse has been showered on chemical warfare methods by those who understand very little about them. It has been claimed by such that gas is particularly atrocious. Feeling on the matter has been so strong in certain quarters that the fact that all war is particularly vile and atrocious seems to have been completely lost sight of. Let us take up this matter in a rational way. In the first place, what do we mean by the atrocity or inhumanity of a weapon? ”

“ But had chemical warfare been a strongly developed and accepted method of war before the outbreak of hostilities, would we then have been prepared? The records of the past, before April, 1915, must be consulted to answer this question. We may find that our position is due to more than a mere negative attitude, to more than our simple neglect of the organic chemical industry. It maybe that there were forces which definitely exploited this national characteristic to our disadvantage. The pre-war policy and activities of the I.G. must be examined from this point of view. ”

“ When the shell burst, the diphenylchloroarsine was finely divided or atomized and produced a cloud of toxic particles. Since smoke particles are only slightly removed by the ordinary mask, this formed a very effective means of chemical warfare.
An analogous result was obtained by the use of poison gases, such as chloropicrin, in a smoke cloud produced from silicon or stannic chloride. Here, however, the toxic material was a real gas, and so the real result attained consisted in forcing the men to wear their masks in all kinds of clouds. ”

“ The factories of the organic chemical industries are more silently converted into arsenals than any other type. It is true that, under normal conditions of warfare, the decisive success of a chemical campaign might be restricted by the use of other weapons, such as artillery. But, under conditions where the latter are seriously limited, the chemical weapon becomes, relatively, of much greater importance. One of the main trends in chemical warfare was the development of devices which would give long-range chemical effects without a complicated form of projector, or with none at all. ”

“ The research worker's nearest confidante and laboratory companion might be unaware that he was developing some new vitally important chemical for warfare. No serious person can claim the possibility of a check upon such research. If, then, the Government of any country desires to provide its chemical factories with suitable subjects for chemical warfare production, these can be produced under ANY international arrangements, however prohibitive. ”

“ The production of a protective appliance, the gas mask, was vital. This development will be considered later. Allied chemical warfare organisations arose, to become an important factor in the later stages of the war. The history of Allied gas organisation is one of the gradual recognition that chemical warfare represented a new weapon with new possibilities, new specific uses, and new requirements from the rear. Its beginnings are seen in the English and French Scientific Advisory Committees appointed to examine the new German method. ”