While it is believed that Germany was the first to use chemical warfare agents, it was actually France who, in August , launched bromine ethyl acetate Fig. Representation of bromine ethyl acetate. Thus Fritz Haber, professor at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Physics in Berlin awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in for the catalytic synthesis of ammonia from hydrogen and atmospheric nitrogen under high temperature and pressure , directed German operations in the field, where the strategy of creating toxic clouds using commercial cylinders of chlorine gas as a dispersion system was attributed to him.
Moreover, it is postulated that Haber selected chlorine gas because it was readily available in the dye industry and it also qualified for military use because it had and an immediate effect, was volatile, and could also become lethal. It was on the Western Front where we could see the remarkable capacity of chemical weapons to terrorize the enemy and make their troops temporarily lose their minds.
The first large-scale attack with chlorine gas occurred on April 22, in the Second Battle of Ypres, Belgium. There, the Germans, hoping the wind was blowing toward the French side to avoid causing damage to their own troops, released tons of chlorine that spread panic among the enemy ranks. The terrified troops fled from the huge yellow cloud creating an opening of four miles in the French first forward line, which represented a significant advancement for the Germans Jones, Just weeks after they recognized the potential of chemical weapons in Ypres, the British and French began to plan a chemical retaliation, which became a triple strategy, as they needed to develop protective devices for their troops, weapons containing toxic gas and dispersion systems that would cross enemy lines.
The day after the Germans used chlorine, the allies developed a rudimentary protective mask and in September they managed to launch their own chemical attack, using chlorine gas in Loos, Belgium History of Chemical Warfare. Medical Aspects of Chemical Warfare, On the battlefield, soldiers from both sides continuously had to face the combination of different types of agents that, in addition to disorient them, sought to undermine both their confidence and their morale.
Chemical weapons produced enormous psychological damage to enemy troops, as they generated uncertainty, and the idea of dying of asphyxiation caused the soldiers to lose their self-control. Although the bursts of machine guns proved far more lethal than chemical agents, the Briton John Hall of the Machine Gun Corps confessed that the gas terrorized him a lot more than facing artillery fire. Indeed, one of the main effects of chemical weapons on the enemy was psychological.
Lieutenant Colonel S. Cummins, consultant pathologist with the British army in France, concluded that all divisions that were continuously exposed to chemical attack showed a significant drop in morale.
The medical officer Charles Wilson was even more emphatic in ensuring that most of the men that had been gassed were frankly left in shock. By , after studying its effects, the English had concluded that although they had not been designed to sow terror, the violent sensation of suffocation caused by chlorine and phosgene undermined the will of even the most determined soldiers.
In fact, the mere rumor of a chemical attack even had an effect on troops that had not been previously gassed. For example, a group of American soldiers, convinced of having consumed contaminated food, began to feel stomach pain and some even experienced vomiting Jones, , pp.
In that context, both for their offensive capacity and the need to defend themselves against chemical attacks, the belligerent powers began a competition to develop better protective masks, more potent chemical products, and delivery systems with better range for dispersing chemical agents during battles.
In December , the Germans introduced phosgene, which was six times more potent than chlorine and when inhaled could be lethal without presenting symptoms of chlorine poisoning, such as coughing. This gas was used both by the Germans and the allies.
In May the Germans perfected their attacks when they began to use diphosgene Fig. Two months later the French used hydrogen cyanide, and later also used cyanogen chloride, albeit with limited effectiveness, given the low persistence of the compounds Pita, It was during the night of July 12—13, , in the eve of Third Battle of Ypres, when the Germans introduced yperite or mustard gas Fig. Yperite, a blistering agent, produced lesions on the skin irritation and tissue destruction blisters , not only in the airways, thus the use of masks was not sufficient for protection.
Mustard gas was especially damaging because the lesions took several hours to appear after skin contact, and the soldiers were not aware of exposure to the toxic substance until after experiencing its harmful consequences. Because of the novelty of its effects, it was immediately after its introduction when the highest casualties were caused. The very first use of gas, in the form of grenades rather than shells, is thought to have been carried out by the French in - the attack was so ineffectual that few even knew it had taken place until the war was over.
But even in World War One there were those who argued gas was no worse than other weapons. The first-named form of death, as a matter of fact, is the most merciful," wrote one Dr J F Elliott to his local paper in Other terrible weapons were developed at the same time. The flamethrower appear on the Western Front in , two months before gas. Others weapons, like the machine gun, were honed to new levels of murderous perfection.
The biggest killer of all was artillery. Yet it was only the use of all gas that was outlawed by the Geneva Protocol of Exactly why gas was singled out is disputed. The Protocol itself makes the lofty statement that gas "has been justly condemned by the general opinion of the civilised world". But the only reason countries were prepared to ban it, some argue, is that it was ineffective.
John Singer Sargent's painting of a line of blinded soldiers came to be known by a one word title: "Gassed. It appears today to be a visual condemnation of the horrors of gas warfare. The temporary blindness was a metaphor, a semi-religious purgatory for British youth on the way to resurrection. You can see the guy-ropes of a field hospital tent depicted, and the men are being led towards it.
Casualty figures do seem on the face of it, to back up the idea that gas was less deadly than the soldiers' fear of it might suggest. The total number of British and Empire war deaths caused by gas, according to the Imperial War Museum, was about 6, - less than a third of the fatalities suffered by the British on the first day of the Battle of the Somme in Of the 90, soldiers killed by gas on all sides, more than half were Russian, many of whom may not even have been equipped with masks.
Far more soldiers were injured. Some , British and Empire service personnel were classed as gas casualties - , of those in the last two years of the war as mustard gas came into use. The overwhelming majority though went on to make good recoveries. But Edgar Jones disagrees. By the summer of gas was inflicting a significant number of casualties, he argues, removing men from the battlefield for six to eight weeks, tying-up beds and nurses, and using up valuable resources.
And it was effective as a psychological weapon too, he says. In the final analysis, Jones says, it was banned because it was "not quite cricket". Jeremy Paxman sees both factors in play - primarily it was revulsion, he suggests, but also it was accepted that gas had not lived up to expectations.
Geneva was an attempt to civilise war," he says. Wilfred Owen was at the front as a lieutenant with the Second Battalion, the Manchester Regiment, from January to May , when he was knocked out by an explosion and diagnosed with shell shock. With the introduction of poison gas, many contemporaries feared that the Germans had discovered a war-winning weapon. But the introduction of increasingly effective gas masks and other precautions helped counter the German advantage.
The British responded with their own chlorine attacks in September , during which a change in wind direction resulted in more than 2, British soldiers being gassed by their own chemicals. Deadlier gasses and more reliable delivery systems were introduced later in the war. By , chemical shells, projectors, and mortars could deposit dense gas barrages on enemy lines, or behind them on supply routes, reserve trenches, or gun batteries.
Phosgene, introduced in late , was nearly invisible and much more lethal than chlorine. The Germans unleashed mustard gas in the summer of
0コメント