The most dangerous weapon in World War I, by far, was chemical warfare: the use of toxic chemicals to kill or injure people in a war. In the specific case of World War I, World War I was the first successful large-scale use of chemical warfare, which is why the Great War is sometimes referred to as the chemist's war (NCBI). Chemical weapons, overall, revolutionized warfare in World War I.
Some examples of chemical warfare include tear, mustard, chlorine, and phosgene gas. The first time chemical warfare was utilized was in 1915, when the Germans opened specially-placed pressurized liquid chlorine cylinders around the French trenches. As the gas slowly moved across the French troops, more than 1000 soldiers died and even crops were destroyed. Mustard gas would decay skin on contact by creating large blisters, and had the potential to cause permanent eye damage at substantial exposure. Tear gas irritated the eyes and lungs, and was meant to incapacitate enemies from fighting back, but actually did not end up as effective as intended. Phosgene was a colorless, highly toxic compound that could lead to suffocation. All of these types of gases were used for offensive purposes at first, then later for defensive purposes.
Why did the use of chemical warfare end? Though chemical warfare seemed to prove effective at first, it posed a great risk to manufacturers of toxic chemicals and obviously to those who used them on the battlefield. Both sides of the war eventually stopped using chemical weapons because if one side used them, the other side was basically guaranteed to do so as well.
We must keep in mind the dangers of chemical warfare as a physical, and especially psychological, weapon. Even though it marked a significant point in military history, the use of chemical weapons caused more than 90,000 deaths and 1.3 million casualties by the end of the war. Chemical weapons were not like guns, cannons, or other visible artillery: they were the only enemies in the Great War that could not be detected until it was too late.
Some examples of chemical warfare include tear, mustard, chlorine, and phosgene gas. The first time chemical warfare was utilized was in 1915, when the Germans opened specially-placed pressurized liquid chlorine cylinders around the French trenches. As the gas slowly moved across the French troops, more than 1000 soldiers died and even crops were destroyed. Mustard gas would decay skin on contact by creating large blisters, and had the potential to cause permanent eye damage at substantial exposure. Tear gas irritated the eyes and lungs, and was meant to incapacitate enemies from fighting back, but actually did not end up as effective as intended. Phosgene was a colorless, highly toxic compound that could lead to suffocation. All of these types of gases were used for offensive purposes at first, then later for defensive purposes.
Why did the use of chemical warfare end? Though chemical warfare seemed to prove effective at first, it posed a great risk to manufacturers of toxic chemicals and obviously to those who used them on the battlefield. Both sides of the war eventually stopped using chemical weapons because if one side used them, the other side was basically guaranteed to do so as well.
We must keep in mind the dangers of chemical warfare as a physical, and especially psychological, weapon. Even though it marked a significant point in military history, the use of chemical weapons caused more than 90,000 deaths and 1.3 million casualties by the end of the war. Chemical weapons were not like guns, cannons, or other visible artillery: they were the only enemies in the Great War that could not be detected until it was too late.
Sources:
1. NCBI: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376985/
2. Compound Interest: http://www.compoundchem.com/2014/05/17/chemical-warfare-ww1/
I love that you mention that it was a psychological weapon, what specifically do you mean by that? It's interesting to think that these dangerous weapons were banned because they knew if either side used it, it would end in disaster. However, the same could be said for atomic bombs today. It's true that not every country has these, and most people argue that they're for protection and wouldn't be used. But, people said that about many previous weapons where they said that these weapons were so dangerous that peace would result because both sides using these weapons would be just too deadly. It seems silly to me that they banned chemical weapons but have not banned other much more dangerous weapons.
ReplyDelete