An essay on the use of chemical warfare in the great war

Gun powder in the 16th and 17th centuries meant that - finally, sadly - one could eliminate many of his enemies with one agent of offensive effort, an artillery round. Ultimately, in WWII it was demonstrated that a single atomic weapon could kill more than one hundred thousand of the enemy with a single use of a single weapon.

An essay on the use of chemical warfare in the great war

Weapons of World War I Tear gas[ edit ] The most frequently used chemicals during World War I were tear-inducing irritants rather than fatal or disabling poisons. The stocks were rapidly consumed and by November a new order was placed by the French military. As bromine was scarce among the Entente allies, the active ingredient was changed to chloroacetone.

Large-scale use and lethal gases[ edit ] The first instance of large-scale use of gas as a weapon was on 31 Januarywhen Germany fired 18, artillery shells containing liquid xylyl bromide tear gas on Russian positions on the Rawka Riverwest of Warsaw during the Battle of Bolimov.

Instead of vaporizing, the chemical froze and failed to have the desired effect. At high concentrations and prolonged exposure it can cause death by asphyxiation. This is a horrible weapon Surviving defenders drove back the attack and retained the fortress.

An essay on the use of chemical warfare in the great war

Germany used chemical weapons on the eastern front in an attack at Rawkasouth of Warsaw. The Russian army took 9, casualties, with more than 1, fatalities. In response, the artillery branch of the Russian army organised a commission to study the delivery of poison gas in shells.

Men who stood on the parapet suffered least, as the gas was denser near the ground. The worst sufferers were the wounded lying on the ground, or on stretchers, and the men who moved back with the cloud. The gas produced a visible greenish cloud and strong odour, making it easy to detect.

It was water-soluble, so the simple expedient of covering the mouth and nose with a damp cloth was effective at reducing the effect of the gas.

It was thought to be even more effective to use urine rather than water, as it was known at the time that chlorine reacted with urea present in urine to form dichloro urea.

The Germans issued their troops with small gauze pads filled with cotton waste, and bottles of a bicarbonate solution with which to dampen the pads. Immediately following the use of chlorine gas by the Germans, instructions were sent to British and French troops to hold wet handkerchiefs or cloths over their mouths.

Simple pad respirators similar to those issued to German troops were soon proposed by Lieutenant-Colonel N. These pads were intended to be used damp, preferably dipped into a solution of bicarbonate kept in buckets for that purpose; other liquids were also used.

Because such pads could not be expected to arrive at the front for several days, army divisions set about making them for themselves. Locally available muslin, flannel and gauze were used, officers were sent to Paris to buy more and local French women were employed making up rudimentary pads with string ties.

Other units used lint bandages manufactured in the convent at Poperinge. Pad respirators were sent up with rations to British troops in the line as early as the evening of 24 April. The response was enormous and a million gas masks were produced in a day. The Mail's design was useless when dry and caused suffocation when wet—the respirator was responsible for the deaths of scores of men.

By 6 Julythe entire British army was equipped with the more effective " smoke helmet " designed by Major Cluny MacPhersonNewfoundland Regimentwhich was a flannel bag with a celluloid window, which entirely covered the head.

The race was then on between the introduction of new and more effective poison gases and the production of effective countermeasures, which marked gas warfare until the armistice in November The offensive use of living organisms (such as anthrax) is considered biological warfare rather than chemical warfare; however, the use of nonliving toxic products produced by living organisms (e.g.

toxins such as botulinum toxin, ricin, and saxitoxin) is considered chemical warfare under the provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). - The Chemical Corps Regiment The US Army Chemical Corps history began back in World War I as the Chemical Warfare Service. World War I came to be known as the “Chemists War” because of the first uses of chemical warfare agents (Fitzgerald, ).

More Essay Examples on. Change to Chemical Warfare in The Great War. The determination by the Germans to foremost utilize chemical bombs was a really controversial. one - Change To Chemical Warfare In The Great Essay introduction.

Not merely did it open up a can of worms in World War one, but changed the face of. conflict for old ages to come.

Chemical weapons have been used throughout history, but in the Vietnam War they had a great impact. The chemical weapons use the toxic properties of chemical substances instead of explosive properties to produce physical or physiological effects on an enemy.

One of the enduring hallmarks of WWI was the large-scale use of chemical weapons, commonly called, simply, ‘gas’. Although chemical warfare caused less than 1% of the total deaths in this war, the ‘psy-war’ or fear factor was formidable. The widespread use of these agents of chemical warfare, and wartime advances in the composition of high explosives, gave rise to an occasionally expressed view of World War I as "the chemist's war" and also the era where weapons of mass destruction were created.

Change To Chemical Warfare In The Great Essay Example | Graduateway