View the H-War Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-War's May 2000 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in H-War's May 2000 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the H-War home page.
Dr. Phillips is indeed correct in making the case that the German use of mustard gas was a tactical success throughout the war. Along with other lethal gases - especially phosgene and diphosgene - the artillery attack doctrines of all armies on the Western Front involved heavy use of chemical shells. However, the assertion that gas was but a defensive weapon is inaccurate. Chemical bombardments were an essential part of counter-battery fire. By 1918, they often made up over 40% of the shells fired in c/b work. Equally important, gas shells helped to isolate the enemy target, be it a trench or area of the front, by laying chemical barriers and thereby confining it in much the same way as a box barrage of high explosives. Defenders were cut-off as they tried to hold their trenches and all too aware that few reinforcements would be able to make their way through the chemical clouds with respirators attached. At the same time, the use of gas to wear down and attrite the enemies fighting efficiency has consistently been underestimated by historians examining the Great War. One needs only to turn to the letters, diaries and memoirs of the trench soldiers to see that poison gas was indeed a constant and deadly apparition on the battlefield. Those armies that failed to protect their soldiers with good respirators and an anti-gas doctrine ran the very real possibility of receiving massive casualties; moreover, soldiers who were gassed day in and day out, like during the Last 100 Days, were prone to malingering, illness and general apathy. These were significant, if less easily quantifiable, results from the use of poison gas. Although statistics are notoriously unreliable, it is worth noting that the generally accepted number of casualties was between 1-1.3 million in all armies. The American Expeditionary Force, after arriving late and largely untrained in anti-gas discipline, had a full one quarter of the total casualties a result of poison gas. Although this is a brief response to Dr. Phillips and Colonel Zabecki, it seems clear to me that after examining hundreds of letters, diaries and memoirs, when coupled with a thorough search through the primary archival documents, that poison gas was an important, if up to now neglected, weapon in the arsenals of all armies during the Great War. Having a flimsy respirator to protect against lethal lung gasses did little to ease the soldier's mind, not to mention making movement almost impossible. When this fear was coupled with the introduction of mustard gas, there was very little protection - both physical and psychological - for soldiers. The Western Front remains the first and only chemical battlefield. For those interested in reading more about gas warfare in the Great War, and here I will shamelessly plug myself, you might want to get you hands on my new book (it is in softcover): Tim Cook, _No Place To Run: The Canadian Corps and Gas Warfare in the First World War_. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1999. Tim Cook National Archives of Canada tim@archives.ca <<<Editor's Note: Those especially interested in this topic should note the related query in today's H-War transmissions. -- MPP>>> ************************************************* *************************************************
|